Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1993.volume.13/vol13.iss401-450

Text File | 1993-07-05 | 1MB | 27,157 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04904;
          19 Jun 93 4:58 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12570
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 02:18:24 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12799
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 02:18:01 -0500
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 02:18:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #401

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 19 Jun 93 02:18:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 401

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What is a 'Trunk'? (Al Varney)
    Re: What is a 'Trunk'? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Spuyten Duyvil and Similar Areas (Bryan D. Boyle)
    Re: Spuyten Duyvil and Similar Areas (Lee S. Parks)
    Re: Spuyten Duyvil and Similar Areas (Mike King)
    Re: Remember the War on Pagers? Try This on For Size! (Charles Mattair)
    Re: Remember the War on Pagers? Try This on For Size! (Dave Hsu)
    Re: Need Modem Lockout Circuit (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Need Modem Lockout Circuit (Jeremy Ginger)
    Re: Headset Equipped Cordless? (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Headset Equipped Cordless? (Matt White)
    Re: Cordless Headset That Works With ISOETEC "EZ" Phones? (Mark Terribile)
    Re: Cordless Headset That Works With ISOETEC "EZ" Phones? (Slonim Edwin)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 16:56:05 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What is a 'Trunk'?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Haber)
writes from his foxhole on the front lines of the Trunk Holy Wars!:

> Tansin A. Darcos & Company ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> The user asked the question, "What is a trunk?"
>> A "trunk" is an actual, physical path and/or circuit available for the
>> transmission of information in a telephone system.  For example, a
>> pair of telephone wire represents one "trunk".  A fiber-optic cable,
>> because it can multiplex many simultaneous connections, may have
>> 10,000 "trunks" in it.

>> ...You have "300 phone lines" inside the building, but only "40
>> trunks" coming from the outside.

> I agree 100%, but tell that to my GTE rep!

> Having most of my experience in the PBX end of telephony, I think of
> trunks automatically as outside lines and 'lines' as inside lines.  A
> single line connection to a residence is a trunk also, although it's
> not commonly referred to that way ...

> HOWEVER, my GTE rep should be used to dealing with big business
> customers, and everytime I call up to add more 'trunks' (GTE outside
> lines) to my switch, we get in a BIG argument.  "No, you don't want
> trunks," she insists.  "Those are something different.  You want
> ground start business lines."

   Having all my experience in the switching end of telephony, I think
of trunks as "inter-office" circuits and lines as "user-to-central-office"
circuits.  But even that is colored by 1E/1A ESS(tm) Switch internals.
The reality is that TRUNKS and LINES are not as clearly separated as
the Telephone industry would suggest.

   Bellcore's {BOC Notes on the LEC Network} isn't even consistent in
it's usage from page to page.  For example, "Notes" states that PBXs
use TRUNKS to connect to central offices, then three paragraphs later
mentions "PBX lines" when discussing those same circuits.  That's
probably because most CO switching people recognize either term, and
use the appropriate one based on context.

   The classic LINE definition is a two- or four-wire access interface
between a switching office (the telephone network) and a customer
point.  The most important word here is ACCESS.  TRUNKS are circuits
that interconnect switching points in the telephone network.  So from
a PBX viewpoint, a line is the PBX-attached telephone (using anything
from two analog wires to packet voice LANs) and a trunk is the circuit
interconnecting the PBX to a CO.  From the TELCo's perspective, it's
the PBX itself making the call (i.e., ACCESSing the network), so the
PBX circuit is a line and any circuit interconnecting the CO to other
parts of the telephone network is a trunk.

   Even within the TELCo, there are circuits typically called trunks
at one end and lines at another -- tie trunks, tie lines and FX lines
are examples of the mixed terms used for very similar applications.
Note that connections to non-customer terminals such as announcements,
tones, operators, intercept equipment, test equipment and test panels
are called trunks, since they are not access circuits that "leave the
network".

   Another way of describing lines is as circuits that receive billing
and trunks as circuits that are unbilled.  But various kludges since
the '40s have used "trunk circuits" in a billed manner, so that view
is also not accurate.

   GTE probably insists on the "line" view because that's the tariff
language.  In a tariff, various types of access lines are mentioned.
Some TELCos offer "trunk" connections, but only to such entities as
other TELCos, IXCs, Mobile Carriers.  So GTE isn't tariffed to offer
you a "trunk" connection.


Al Varney - opinion only

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: What is a 'Trunk'?
Date: 19 Jun 1993 00:23:29 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Haber)
writes:

> HOWEVER, my GTE rep should be used to dealing with big business
> customers, and everytime I call up to add more 'trunks' (GTE outside
> lines) to my switch, we get in a BIG argument.  "No, you don't want
> trunks," she insists.  "Those are something different.  You want
> ground start business lines."  I could not pin her down, however, on
> what she thought a trunk was ... I just have to remember not to use
> the 'T' word when I call GTE ...

The GTE rep is using her terminology correctly (at least as far as I
understand the technology :-).  Of course, she is referring to things
from the point of view of the telco switch, which may be different
from your point of view.  A telco switch generally has two sides -- a
"trunk" side and a "line" side.  The line side is the one that
subcribers connect to for POTS lines, including the "ground start
business line" that you ordered.  The trunk side of the switch
connects to the trunk side of other telco switches, and can also
connect to customers.  A common "trunk" that a customer might order
would be a DID trunk.  Also, if you have direct T1 access to an LEC's
switch, it is most likely on the trunk side of the switch.  Of course,
if you try to apply a similar terminology to your switch, your
extensions are indeed "lines," and your connections to the telco could
be considered "trunks," even though in your case they connect to
"lines" from the telco.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bryan D. Boyle)
Subject: Re: Spuyten Duyvil and Similar Areas
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bryan D. Boyle)
Organization: Exxon Research & Engineering
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 12:21:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:

A whole lot 'o deletin' goin' on...

> I have no idea what exchanges are used in Marble Hill.  However,
> Manhattan College just north in Riverdale uses 920, and the two
> apartments I lived in used 796 and 549 respectively.

> If you ever return to the area, the pastor of the local Presbyterian
> Church sponsors a free history walk thru the Marble Hill, Spuyten
> Duyvil, and Kingsbridge neighborhoods every May.  Don't worry, despite
> the Bronx's bad rep, these neighborhoods are the best kept secrets in
> New York City.

I will second that emotion in the last paragraph ... if you do visit
the area, then go a little more north on the Henry Hudson Parkway to
Mosholu Parkway east and visit the Bronx Zoo and Botanical Gardens
(and Fordham University's campus, a lot nicer than Manhattan's...:-))

(I know this has nothing to do with telecom, but a little culture never
hurt any subject discussion ...;))


Bryan D. Boyle         |EMAIL: [e-mail]
#include <disclaimer>  |Hack first and ask questions later.
908 730-3338           |ER & E Co. Rt. 22 East, Annandale, NJ

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lee S. Parks)
Subject: Re: Spuyten Duyvil and Similar Areas
Date: 18 Jun 1993 14:34:54 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


For reasons arising from accients of history the phone service in
Greenwich, Connecticut is provided by New York Telephone and is
included in the metro-N.Y. LATA (212, 917, 718, 516 and part of 914).
There are also funny quirks that give New Jersey Bell the right to
offer inter-LATA service between [portions] of Northern Jersey and the
metro-N.Y. LATA.  I don't really remember all of the details
concerning these areas (there were a lot) which were spelled out as
part of divestiture.


lee ([e-mail])

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 08:57:26 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Spuyten Duyvil and Similar Areas


In TELECOM Digest, V13, #388, [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
writes:

> This is a bit late, but in a message a few days ago, Carl Moore talked
> about some geographic oddities and how they receive phone service
> (such as Carter Lake, Iowa).  I know of a few more:

> 1) Lost Peninsula, Michigan ... was part of Ohio (it's adjacent to
  [...]

> 2) Point Roberts, Washington ... physically connected to Canada and
> not to the rest of Washington State (kids used to take a bus 40 miles
> through Canada to get to school in Blaine, Washington).  Used to get
> phone service from BC Tel, and was a local call to the metro Vancouver
> area.  Don't know what the status of any of this is today.

> 3) Angle Inlet, Minnesota ... physically connected to Saskatchewan,
  [...]

> I'd be kind of interested to know how phone service is currently
> provided to these communities.  By the way, Point Roberts is/was NOT
> the only example of cross-border local calling between the U.S. and
> Canada, though instances of such are relatively rare and usually
> confined to very small towns.

I checked with a correspondent who lives in a Vancouver suburb, and
his response is:

" ...their one exchange (945) is in the 206 area code, which is
Washington State; and the BC Tel operator tells me that, at least from
here, it is a long distance call ($0.14 / minute). However, that may
be merely from my community (New Westminster); that's a very low
price, lower than any of the within-BC prices, so it may well be a
local call from metro Vancouver. I know there is one BC area service,
MindLink, that among other things will allow you to call US 800
numbers; they run a dedicated line across to Pt. Roberts, I think. I
can get details from them, if it's really of interest."

     [Charles Wangersky]


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 10:05:13 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: Remember the War on Pagers? Try This on For Size!
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob
Boudrie) writes:

>> When the officer searched the suspect, imagine his surprise at finding
>> a realistic looking, ersatz pager that turns into a FUNCTIONING .22
>> caliber handgun (I guess about the size and range of a Derringer).
>> The report was that it was dangerous, and available in convincing
>> neon/day-glo colors to avoid detection ...

> This report is utter BS.  <etc>

This is not utter BS.  They had one of these little playtoys on the
local news last week.  Kinda sorta like a fold up Derringer (sp?).
Single shot .22 - I would suspect .22 short.

Probably wouldn't kill you but still nothing to triffle with.


Charles Mattair        (work)    [e-mail]
<standard.disclaimer>    (home)    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Remember the War on Pagers? Try This on For Size!
Organization: Pix -- The company with no adult supervision.
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 01:51:24 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
mil writes:

> I haven't seen these actual weapons, but in the photos they look
> nothing like pagers.  Though they are small, based on the reports of
> officers concealing them in cigarette packs (using them as backup
> weapons).

> Probably about as accurate and useful as any firearm with about a
> one-inch barrel (that is not very, unless *extremely* close), but it
> raises "concealability" to new levels!

The gun in question is the North American Arms .22LR revolver with
their optional "Holster Grip".  Its barrel length is actually 1 5/8"
and the folding, locking grip actually renders this gun somewhat
bulkier than with the original grip.  It wasn't designed to look like
a pager, and after seeing the TV reports I was struck by how much it
resembles a Spyderco Clipit pocketknife when carried in the pocket.

Oddly, the police seem unaware of the holster that IS designed to look
like a pager, advertised in Shotgun News by a company in Waco, Texas
(is it mere coincidence?  Hmmm ...)  Approximately the same size as the
N.A.A.  revolver, but marked on the front "SATLINK ***** WIDE AREA
PAGING", this "pager" has a button on top which releases the front
cover, revealing the inner compartment and a retaining strap.  The
compartment is sized to accept a variety of compact handguns, avail-
able in calibers up to .32ACP.

Yet another reason to favor the credit-card-sized pagers.


Dave Hsu     <[e-mail]> -or- <[e-mail]>
Gruppenslackerfuhrer    Pix Technologies Corporation

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Need Modem Lockout Circuit
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 02:10:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kevin M.
> Patfield) writes:

>> [I hope this isn't a FAQ but our site doesn't have a copy]

>> Can someone please help me with a circuit for preventing someone
>> breaking my modem connection by picking up an extension phone?  I know

> I need just the reverse. I have three dedicated data pots lines and
> one shared voice data. Normally the voice line has data going across

You need an exclusion button on the phone.  Pull up one of the handset
cradle buttons, and a switch in the phone cuts off the modem which is
wired downstream from the phone.  See your local telephonedroid.

You can also do this yourself by mounting a DPDT toggle switch near or
in or on the phone.  The two common lugs on the switch go to the
network interface, the pair on one end of the switch connects to the
phone, the pair of lugs on the other end of the switch connects to the
modem.  The switch is normally in the modem position.  Flip the
switch, wait a few seconds for the remote modem to give up, and pick
the phone up.

Note that both of these methods may need some re-wireing.


Rich Greenberg             Work: ETi Solutions, Oceanside CA 619-631-5280
N6LRT    TinselTown, USA   Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
I speak for myself only.   Canines: Chinook & Husky

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (JEREMY GINGER)
Subject: Re: Need Modem Lockout Circuit
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 11:18:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kevin M.
Patfield) writes:

> Can someone please help me with a circuit for preventing someone
> breaking my modem connection by picking up an extension phone?  I know
> I could just buy a couple from Radio Shack but where's the
> intellectual challenge in that :-) I presume the way these things work
> is to use an scr or something similar to only connect the extension
> phones to the line when line voltage is present.

Connect two Zenner Diodes (11 V) back-to-back in series with the lower
priority line.  If you know the polarity of the wire you can get away
with one Zenner.

Usual warning: Any device connected to the phone company's lines must
be approved.


Jeremy

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 05:08:16 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Headset Equipped Cordless?


> I think a decent 900MHz cordless (Don't need anything other than POTS
> access) with a headset feature would be just the ticket.  Can anyone
> steer me to a vendor / supplier?  Has anyone actually used such an
> instrument?

HelloSet Cordless for $399
900 MHz, 32 channel, 50'

Hello Direct, Inc.
5884 Eden Park Place
San Jose CA  95138
800 444 3556 (800 HI HELLO)
408 972 1990
Fax [phone]


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Matt White)
Subject: Re: Headset Equipped Cordless?
Date: 18 Jun 1993 17:05:00 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan


On Wed, 16 Jun 93 15:38:59 GMT, adams,john ([e-mail].
com) wrote:

> I think a decent 900MHz cordless (Don't need anything other than POTS
> access) with a headset feature would be just the ticket.  Can anyone
> steer me to a vendor / supplier?  Has anyone actually used such an
> instrument?

Well, I don't know if they're still being made, but back when I used
to be a sales droid at Radio Shack, they came out with a cordless
headset phone.  Never saw one (they weren't released yet by the time I
quit -- about summer of '89), but they may still be around (no
guarantee on the sound quality, though ... the other models we used to
have weren't too good).


Matt White                   [e-mail]
User Support & Training      [e-mail]
Dept. of Computing Services  Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, CANADA
University of Saskatchewan   My real computer is an Amiga...

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cordless Headset That Works With ISOETEC "EZ" Key System Phones?
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 03:46:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Helen C. O'Boyle) writes:

> Does anyone know where I might get one?

> Failing this, does anyone know how I might hook up my trusty
> Plantronics Liteset to the usual key-phone jack (everyone has the same
> kind of jack, "by policy"; I'm stuck with the line the way it is
> configured) used for that ISOETEC phone system?  ...

> I would have RTFM'd, but alas, TFM's belong to Corporate MIS and I'm
> in R&D, so I don't have access to them.

Is there any chance as that you can claim either a handicap or a
job-related stress problem that requires the headset?  That might get
the Big Bosses off their high-and-mighty-if-I-want-you-to-know-what's-
good-for-you-I'll-tell-you platform.


(This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end    Mark Terribile
 [e-mail], Somewhere in Matawan, NJ

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Slonim Edwin)
Subject: Re: Cordless Headset That Works With ISOETEC "EZ" Key System Phones?
Date: 18 Jun 1993 12:44:57 GMT
Organization: Intel Israel (74) Ltd.


Helen C. O'Boyle ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Does anyone know where I might get one?

Plantronics also make a model called the SP05, which hooks in-between
the telephone and the handset.  This allows it to work with digital
phone sets and other unusual beasts.  It has volume, sensitivity and
?impedance?  settings so that it will work with almost anything.
About $70.


Edwin Slonim, Intel Software Products, Haifa, Israel, [e-mail]
   phone (011)[phone], fax (011)[phone] voicemail [phone]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #401
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06456;
          19 Jun 93 5:32 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21045
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 03:08:54 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24754
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 03:08:12 -0500
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 03:08:12 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #402

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 19 Jun 93 03:08:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 402

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cordless Phone With Answering Machine Wanted (Dan J. Declerck)
    Re: Cordless Phone With Answering Machine Wanted (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting (Guy Montgomery)
    Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting (Dave Grabowski)
    Re: *67 Caller-ID Question (David G. Lewis)
    CNID and Call Return Marriage (Mark T. Miller)
    Re: Blocking an Unlisted Number (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Opinions Wanted: Future of Healthcare Telecom (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Need Northern Telecom Contact on the Internet (Charles Ledogar)
    Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey (Jeff Wasilko)
    Re: Plugging Telephone Handset Directly Into Phoneline (Jim Rees)
    Re: More "Features" For AT&T's 1-800 Service (John Osmon)
    Re: Who Pays? (Les Reeves)
    Re: Orange Card Customer Service (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Desireable Answering Machine Feature? (Kenneth R. Crudup)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone With Answering Machine Wanted
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 17:00:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Carl
Oppedahl) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris
>> Sattler) writes:

>>> I'm looking to get a cordless phone with a built in answering machine.
>>> I need it to be wall-mountable.  Does anyone know of anything like
>>> this?  Any recommendations?

>> Try reading {Consumers Reports} (Nov 91, I think).  Though the info
>> may be a bit outdated, it helps.

> In my book, I recommend _not_ getting a combined answering machine and
> telephone.  I feel the same way about a combined answering machine and
> cordless phone.  The reason is simple -- if one breaks, you have to
> throw them both away.  What's more, the answering machine that you
> would really like will probably happen not to be packaged with the
> cordless phone that you would really like.  You would end up settling
> for second-best on one or the other.

The major problem with answering machine reliability is the moving
parts of the tape mechanism (same problems exist in VCR's). AT&T now
sells a fully digital answering machine, and Motorola will soon ship a
version of it's cordless phone with a fully digital answering machine
integrated into the base. Therefore the reliability issues you raise
will disappear.

Personal choice will always be an issue with products, this is why
integrated software never really went anywhere (like Lotus Symphony).

Sometimes it works pretty well, like speed-dialers and cellular
phones, Cellular modems and laptops, Hands-free and car-phones, etc.

I guess the market will tell us in about nine months, eh??  Motorola
has a tendency to things pretty well, but then, I'm pretty biased.


Dan DeClerck           EMAIL: [e-mail]
Motorola Cellular APD  Phone: [phone]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 03:46:23 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone With Answering Machine Wanted


> In my book, I recommend _not_ getting a combined answering machine and
> telephone.  I feel the same way about a combined answering machine and
> cordless phone.  The reason is simple -- if one breaks, you have to
> throw them both away.  What's more, the answering machine that you
> would really like will probably happen not to be packaged with the
> cordless phone that you would really like.  You would end up settling
> for second-best on one or the other.

Some units with combined phone and answering machine have the ability
to call another number whenever a message is left.  I haven't seen
this feature in units that did not have an integral telephone.  I
frequently use this feature.

I recently saw an ad for unit that is a combined phone, answering
machine, fax, copier, printer, and scanner!


[Moderator's Note: My fax machine is a Panasonic with all these
features except for printer and scanner.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Guy Montgomery)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 13:28:47 GMT
Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Thomas Chen) writes:

> Just out of curiosity, since telco sends the information between first
> ring and second ring, how many digits can it send? What about the
> thing I heard that some Caller-IDs actually display ASCII? How is that
> done?

Tom,

All of the data, time of call and the calling number, is sent as
ASCII, as are the P and O indicators, according to FSD 01-02-1051. The
data transmission mechanism is very similar to a regular 1200 baud
modem. This document only seems to call out calling number delivery,
but I seem to remember reading somewhere that calling name delivery is
also possible, and since the data is already sent in ASCII it would
not seem to be a problem.  The above document implies that only ten
digits can be sent, but the message format has a byte count in it, so
presumably more characters can be sent.


Guy Montgomery          Hughes Network Systems (HNS),Germantown, MD 20876
Tel: [phone]     Internet: [e-mail]     FAX: [phone]
Opinions are mine, and not necessarily HNS's


[Moderator's Note: We went through this before, and I am almost certain
the data is *NOT* sent as ASCII. Anyone remember my failed experiments
at trying to get my modem to feed the data to my terminal?  It is some
other format.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Grabowski)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, New Jersey
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 03:37:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Thomas Chen) writes:

> Just out of curiosity, since telco sends the information between first
> ring and second ring, how many digits can it send? What about the
> thing I heard that some Caller-IDs actually display ASCII? How is that
> done?

  The Caller-ID signal is a standard Bell 202 carrier -- 1200 baud FSK.
The data sent consists of six fields of information:

1. Channel seizure: 30 bytes of "01010101" to signal the CPE (Customer
Premise Equipment) and synchronize.

2. Carrier: 150ms of a "mark"

3. Message Type: Signifies what type of message follows. This can be
used to signify single or multiple messages, as well as message waiting
features. Note that these are, as of now, not used.

4. Message length: Self-explanatory.

5. Data words: Month, Day, Hour, and Minute of message (8 bytes),
followed by the calling number or "P" for private, "O" for out of area.
All data is transmitted in ASCII.

6. Checksum: To make sure everything came in okay. Some boxes will
display "error" if the checksum doesn't match.

  Theoretically, you could hack a 1200 baud modem to monitor your
phone line and receive CID information. However, you'd have to make
sure that it didn't supervise the line, and it would have to ignore
the fact that 99.99% of the time there wouldn't be a carrier present.

  _Nuts_And_Volts has had an interesting series on Caller ID, if you
want to get involved with hardware. Check the April and May issues.
Also, about a year ago, the "Hardware Hacker" column in
_Radio_Electronics_ (now called _Electronics_Now_) had a bunch of
caller ID tidbits.


Dave    [e-mail]  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Some time ago, I put a tap on my line; fed the
modem from that tap; and had the modem in 'answer mode' at 1200 baud.
I also gave the modem ATH1 to keep it off hook. All I could ever get
was gibberish, apparently because I was expecting ASCII and instead
the telco sent FSK. How would you hack the modem otherwise?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: *67 Caller-ID Question
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 13:27:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Mike Jung) writes:

[description of using *67 to block calling number delivery, yet still
having AT&T voicemail service "know" the number that the call is
coming from, deleted for the sake of brevity.]

> [Moderator's Note: A common error is to mix up Caller-ID and Automatic
> Number Identification (ANI)...
> Your use of *67 does not hide your number from other telcos
> or network services; it is only intended to tell those other telcos or
> network services to not reveal your number to the called party. In the
> case of voicemail supplied by telco, this is just a network service,
> not an actual end user or subscriber. You *cannot ever block ANI* from
> being delivered. *67 has no effect on ANI.

A minor clarification: AT&T is still obligated to act under some
Computer Inquiry II/III constraints.  Other people in my organization
are responsible for this, so I don't claim to be an expert, but one
implication I am aware of is that any services provided by the
regulated AT&T long distance network for AT&T Messaging Service
(probably SM or TM) must be available to any other customer wishing to
provide messaging services by directly connecting to the AT&T network.
Therefore, the fact that AMS gets the caller's ANI, which can not be
blocked by *67, is due to the fact that AT&T offers to directly
connected customers an ANI delivery service, not due to the fact that
the messaging service is provided by AT&T.  If John Publick wanted to
offer John's Voicemail Service by having a voicemail box hooked up to
an AT&T ISDN PRI, he could get the same ANI information as AMS gets.


David G Lewis     AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej  Switching & ISDN Implementation

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark T. Miller)
Subject: CNID and Call Return Marriage
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 19:21:14 EDT


I hadn't seen the combination of CNID and Call Return mentioned before
I got my current GTE phone bill.  According to the enclosure, the NC
PUC has approved the announcement of the number being redialed in
response to an Automatic Call Return.

The notice reads, in part: "when the person you called uses Automatic
Call Return he/she will hear, 'The number of the last incoming call
was (number). To return the call press ONE. Otherwise, please hang
up."

If you block you CNID, the announcement says: "The last calling number
was marked private and cannot be announced. To return the call ..."


Mark T. Miller   [e-mail]   ...uunet!xyzzy!miller

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Blocking an Unlisted Number
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 11:12 -0400


David Lewis asked "Then you need something very different from the
service which is being offered by the telcos -- it offers the listing
name, and the listing name only.".

You touch one of my pet peeves. Given that numbers are cheap (OK, in
1995 they'll be cheap), why can't one standardly have home ISDN that
provides personal phone numbers for each person (or logical entity) in
a household.  Sort of extended distinctive ringing. When placing a
call one would have the option of identifying the caller either
explicitly or by instrument (AKA phone) used?

Of course, with PCS this might all be moot since you'll just have your
own phone and number with you all the time.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 13:44:44 EDT
Subject: Re: Opinions Wanted: Future of Healthcare Telecom
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 4 Jun 93 04:02:05 GMT, [e-mail] (Bob Ackley)
said:

> AT&T has a remote system that allows a rural hospital to
> have xrays read by a radiologist over a phone link (VERY few rural
> hospitals have a radiologist anywhere near, let alone on the medical
> staff).  I looked *VERY* closely at the B&W monitor at a demo some
> years ago and I could not discern any dots or scan lines, just the
> xray image.  The rep said that the image was 1K x 1K bytes, giving
> 2^8 shades of gray.

Much to my regret, AT&T is no longer in that business.  The system to
which you refer is the CommView system, which I worked on for several
years. AT&T still manufactures hardware for its former joint venture
partner, Philips Medical Systems.  As far as I know, Philips is still
selling them.


Andy Sherman   Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Charles Ledogar)
Subject: Re: Need Northern Telecom Contact on the Internet
Date: 18 Jun 93 19:26:23 GMT
Organization: Northern Telecom


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]-mais.
hydro.qc.ca (Wayne Veilleux) writes:

> Does anyone know of a Northern Telecom contact on the Internet, email
> address or ftp anonymous server I can contact that would have this
> kind of information?

Yes, direct your questions to [e-mail].


Charlie Ledogar    Northern Telecom

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 12:36:26 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey


>> [Moderator's Note: This new feature has proven to be a nuisance to
>> administrators of phone systems (in hotels for example) who find
>> themselves getting all these 35 cent charges from extension-users who
>> made a call to 411, and got the call connected that way without the PBX
>> ever knowing about it. Not only do they get the 35 cent charge on the
>> PBX bill, they get the charge for the call itself, which, since it was
>> not seen by the PBX will not show up in the call detail for the
>> purpose of billing the individual responsible.  PAT]

> While I understand that this feature is really annoying for phone
> system admins, I love the feature.  I no longer have either find a pen
> and paper or even remember the number.  This is quite usefull when
> calling from payphones.

At my former job, I was the phone admin. When SNET was ready to start
the service, I got a letter explaining the new auto-connect option
(and it's implications for call accounting and least-cost-routing/
special trunks).

SNET offered to block the service on all of our lines for no charge,
initially. After the start-up period, they would charge $21/per line
to remove the service ...


Jeff   (Now at Information International, [e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: But can you really imagine anyone paying $21 per
line at some future point to have such a worthless feature re-enabled
on their line just so they could pay everytime they used it?  I am
sure for most people, once gone, that 'feature' stays gone.

Centel here in the Chicago area has another pretty useless offering
called 'warm line'. Take your phone off hook and *do nothing*. After a
few seconds of time out, some preset number of your choice will be
dialed. I guess some people find it useful, but if I wanted a private
circuit ringdown, I would just order one; those start ringing immediatly
when they go off hook, not 10-15 seconds into a timeout.  I've never
seen anyone offer this except Centel here in our area.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Plugging Telephone Handset Directly Into Phoneline
Date: 18 Jun 1993 22:11:41 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
Edu (Arthur Kodama) writes:

> So I ask thee knowledgeable Telecom reader, is it possible to make the
> handset transmit onto the line when directly connected to the phone
> line/wall jack?

If you have an old style handset with a carbon mic, then just putting
the mic in series with the receiver will give you a somewhat usable
phone.  The sidetone will be horrible, you may have to shout, you may
not draw enough current to hold the line open, there won't be any
pop/click suppression or long loop compensation, or any of the other
nice things that the WE network gives you, but it will actually work.

But I'll agree with PAT that it's a silly thing to want to do.  I
haven't done it myself since I was a kid and we were served out of the
NOrmandy exchange on a crossbar.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Osmon)
Subject: Re: More "Features" For AT&T's 1-800 Service
Organization: Dell Computer Co
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 22:33:47 GMT


[e-mail] (davidThx) writes:

> [e-mail] (Bill Bogstad) writes:

>> In the May 24th {Information Week} on pg. 20 there is an
>> article discussing new features that AT&T is planning for its 1-800
>> network.  In particular, a call recognition routing feature will allow
>> network managers to automatically route calls based on their ten digit
>> phone number.  One of the suggested uses for this system is to
>> automatically route calls from customers who are delinquent in their
>> bill to your collections office.  Given the result when American
>> Express used ANI to answer calls with the callers name, I can just
>> imagine what customer reactions to this "feature" will be.

Dell has a project to incorporate this kind of service for the ACD
groups here in Austin.  It will also allow Platinum and Gold Account
customer to go directly to "their" representative.

> I'm curious as to what the result was when American Express used ANI,
> and do they still?

> [Moderator's Note: American Express customers got very annoyed and
> very freaked out when the service reps answered the call greeting them
> by name, etc.  Now the reps still get ANI and a picture of the account
> calling them, but they pretend like they don't, and ask the customer
> for their name and number.  PAT]

Hmmm ... where can I get the information on this?  I'm sure our
telephony group would like to know this before they decide to
implement it.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1993 19:30:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Who Pays?


T. Koppel in Denver has discovered what we in Atlanta called the AT&T
honor system.  We were the lucky benefactors of this odd coin phone
behavior for about nine months.

About a year ago, I discovered that indeed a quarter was not required
to make a local call from any 1AESS coin phone in Atlanta.  What you
needed was a 10xxx code that was programmed to carry intra-lata.
Dialing 10xxx + the seven-digit local number was free!

What is really remarkable about this, is not so much that it worked
but where the call went.  Patrick's assumption that it was carried by
the LEC is logical but wrong.

Prepending 10xxx to the local number caused the call to be carried by
AT&T!  This was true for any 10xxx code, regardless of the what
company the 10xxx code was actually belonged to.

The reason for this seems to be that 1+ inter-lata is still sent to
AT&T from most coin phones even if they are presubscribed to another
carrier or you dial 10xxx.  The reason has to do with coin collection
on 1+ toll calls.  0+ toll from coin phones goes to the carrier shown
on the phone, or to the carrier you choose with 10xxx 0+.

This is the case in Atlanta and New York City.

T Koppel may well want to save his quarters while he can.  The coins
in Atlanta quit providing the AT&T honor system about three months ago.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Orange Card Customer Service
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1993 19:05:49 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> David B. Horvath, CDP writes:

> Pat,

> My Orange Card arrived the other day (I was away for two weeks, so don't
> know exactly when it arrived) and I tried it yesterday. No luck.

> I called customer service, was on hold for < five minutes, and got the
> representative that entered my account information in the first place!
> In about 30 seconds he figured the problem out and put a correction in
> motion.

I had the same thing.  My Orange Card wouldn't work.  I called
Customer Service and they diagnosed the problem over the phone.  They
promised me 15 minute turnaround on the fix.  I didn't check it that
quickly, so I don't know whether they met that goal.

Users should note that LDS doesn't have 24 hour, or even weekend,
customer service.  The first time I called, their answering service
promised me a callback that day (Saturday) but no callback was
received until Monday morning.

Nonetheless, I'm glad I have the thing.


Ed Greenberg   [e-mail]   Ham Radio: KM6CG


[Moderator's Note: Customers of Orange Card are still so relatively
rare (there are a few hundred of you now) that 24 hour customer
service is really hard to justify.  Over the next few months watch for
much more elaborate customer service features. Right now, it is still
just a couple people in that department. I think Orange has a dozen
employees in total, but then, so did Bell back in 1877-78.  :)   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 17:08:06 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Desireable Answering Machine Feature?
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> Instead, if you have Caller-ID, then it might be nice to just record
> the time and number.  That way, you have the choice of trying the
> number.  I'm very frustrated by people who don't leave messages.

I think the solution to this problem is a better answering machine. My
unit (Pana KX-T2634) determines a hangup (or even a hesitate-hangup)
and winds the tape back and decrements the messages recieved indicator.

Can't agonize over what I never got.


Kenneth R. Crudup, ATT BL, 1600 Osgood St, N. Andover, MA 01845-1043
MV20-3T5B, [phone].   [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #402
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09356;
          19 Jun 93 18:05 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08534
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 15:57:32 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16195
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 15:57:03 -0500
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 15:57:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #403

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 19 Jun 93 15:57:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 403

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Traffic Chokes For High Volume Subscribers (Philip Gladstone)
    Re: 800 Number Telnet Access (Dan Gillmor)
    Re: Interesting News From Ohio Bell (Al Varney)
    Re: Looking for a Number in Calgary, Alberta Canada (Darren G. Holloway)
    Re: AT&T Special Country Plan Has Problems With UK! (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Non Availability of 800/NXX (David Leibold)
    New Position: Director of Telecommunications (Dan Boehlke)
    MCI F&F Scam (Eric Dittman)
    Some Thoughts About Prepaid Calling Cards (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Re: Talk Tickets Now Available Electronically (Robert Eden)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Philip Gladstone)
Subject: Re: Traffic Chokes For High Volume Subscribers
Date: 19 Jun 1993 13:59:39 -0400
Organization: Citicorp
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Bill Garfield ([e-mail]) wrote:

> According to a Bell supervisor, their tariffs do not permit them to
> place high traffic volume customers such as {Ticketron} in a "Choke"
> exchange. Traffic chokes are only tariffed for use on radio station
> contest lines.

This does not seem to be the case in Boston. A quick search of phone
book reveals that the (617) 931 exchange looks like a choke exchange.
The following are the directory entries that list under 617 931 xxxx.

Interestingly enough, Ticketmaster does list here along with some
other "non radio stations". Greater Media is one of the local cable
providers. I'm almost tempted to call "Soso entertainment" to see if
their entertainment is better than their name would suggest!!


Greater Media Inc
Kiss 108 Wxks-Fm-Request & Contest Line
Oldies 103 Fm
Soso Entertainment
Ticketmaster-Charge-By-Phone
Waaf 107.3 Fm-2 Westborough Business Park We-Request Line
Wbcn 104 Fm-Contest Line
Wbos 92.9 Fm-Listener Line-Studios
Wcdj Fm 96.9-Listener Line
Wcgy Radio
Whdh Radio-Contest Line
Wild Radio Contest & Request
Wkku 1510 Am-Listener Line
Wmex-1150 Am-Request Line
Wmjx 106.7 Fm-Request Line
Wqtv Contest Lines
Wrko General Broadcasting
Wssh 99.5 F M, Studios
Wvbf-Fm 105.7 Listener Line
Wvjv-Tv 66, Request & Contest Line
Wxks Kiss-108-Fm-108 Request And Contest Line
Wxlo, Request Line
Wzlx-Fm Classic Hits-Request Line
Wzou-Contest-Request Line


Philip Gladstone - Consultant
Citicorp Global Information Network
I don't speak for Citicorp. I presume that somebody else does!

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dan Gillmor)
Subject: Re: 800 Number Telnet Access
Date: 19 Jun 1993 22:14:28 GMT
Organization: Detroit Free Press


Another way to get access in almost any city is through Holonet.
Telnet holonet.net and login as Guest for a sample. They use PSI and
(I believe) Sprintnet numbers in various cities and towns around the
country.


Dan Gillmor    Internet: [e-mail]
Detroit Free Press   CompuServe: 73240,334
3001 W. Big Beaver Rd. -- Suite 602  Voice: 313-649-9770
Troy, MI 48084      Fax: [phone]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 12:31:25 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Interesting News From Ohio Bell
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(david.g.lewis) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff
> Miller) writes:

>> First was a short blurb contained in the monthly "news" insert,
>> exhorting callers to let the distant phone ring "at least six times"
>> when placing a call.  If I were a cynical sort, I would say this is a
>> hidden ploy to generate more revenue for IXC's (who all seem to say to
>> hang up after five rings, else be charged for a one-minute call), or
>> has the answer-supervision problem at long last been solved?

> The answer-supervision problem was only a problem for some IXCs to
> begin with, and it no longer exists except for those IXCs too cheap to
> install equipment that can properly handle the signaling.

> If *I* were a cynical type, I'd say it's a hidden ploy to increase the
> LEC's revenue for IXC access, because access charges begin accruing
> from the moment that the IXC returns wink (on MF trunks) or the moment
> that the LEC sends the SS7 ISUP IAM to the IXC (on SS7 ISUP trunks),
> regardless of whether the call is answered.

   True only for the originating LATA access charges.  For SS7/FG-D,
terminating charges begin when the IXC sends the call into the LATA.
For unanswered calls over FG-A and FG-B circuits, the terminating LEC
does not usually collect revenue, since those forms of IXC
interconnect do not start billing until answer.  Some IXCs use this
form of terminating access to reduce costs, depending on tariffs.


Al Varney - opinion only

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 05:49:28 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Darren G. Holloway)
Subject: Re: Looking For a Number in Calgary, Alberta Canada


Pat writes:

> I'm sure you can get a directory at little or no charge by asking
> Alberta Telephone; the provincial government runs the phone service
> there. Contact them in Calgary.  PAT]

FYI ...

Sorry, but the telephone service is now a public corporation, and
losing money fast -- the government thought it could make tons of money
by selling shares, but ends up propping up the company anyway.

Long, agitated tiff about Tory policies and the people who just
re-elected them barely avoided :)


Darren G. Holloway       Systems Admin / Programmer
[e-mail]  INSTAR Corporation

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: AT&T Special Country Plan Has Problems With UK!
Date: 19 Jun 1993 09:10:12 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Jonathan Bradshaw) writes:

> [story deleted about problem with AT&T calling plan billing]

> AT&T tell me that for some reason the interaction between Indiana Bell
> (my local co) and their computers is not registering that I am calling
> England even tho all my bills show 'UK' for the destination. They say
> there is nothing they can do about it until the technical problem has
> been resolved.

> [Moderator's Note: It will do you no good at all to talk to Indiana
> Bell; AT&T has to pressure them and if they can't do it, no one can.
> Or to paraphrase something I heard awhile back, "divestiture is here;
> AT&T's relationship with the Bells is very queer; get used to it."  PAT]

I was having a problem that was similar: it was a problem with my AT&T
Custom Calling Card, but the responsible party was US West.  It was
very difficult to get resolved.  The Custom Calling Card is like the
old Call Me cards, except they can have up to 10 valid destination
numbers.  So, the Custom Calling Card can be used to call only to the
numbers that you pre-designate.  The purpose of the card is so that
you can give it out to people you really don't trust, so that they can
call you and only you on your dime.

The problem was that US West was not honoring the restriction for
intra-LATA sequence calls.  So, if you placed an intra-LATA call via
US West to a number that was valid for the AT&T Custom Calling Card
you used, then hit #, you could then call *any* number within the
LATA, and have the charge billed to the "restricted" card.  The
problem was in the US West calling card authorization computer: it was
only programmed to deal with the regular unrestricted cards, and the
Call Me card, which is restricted to call only the number on the card.

Since the Custom Calling Card doesn't have the 'call me' bit set when
the approval comes back from the validation database, US West was
assuming that it was unrestricted.  When you used # to make sequence
calls, US West did not bother to query the validation database again --
they figured that if the card was valid a moment ago, that it still
must be valid, so why bother doing another database dip.  They did not
account for the (new) possibility of the validity of the card number
depending on the called number.

Anyway, when I discovered the problem, it was very difficult even
trying to report it.  US West said "oh, and AT&T Calling Card?  Call
AT&T."  AT&T said that since the call was not being handled by their
network, that US West had to fix it.  This was indeed correct, but
nobody at US West was even able to understand the problem, let alone
do anything about it.  After pushing the matter with AT&T, I got to
talk with someone that was familiar with the issue.  They told me that
they were aware of the problem, and had told US West, but that US West
was being slow about the fix, and that there was nothing they could do
except apply more pressure to US West to fix their software.

This was over a year ago.  I checked three months after my initial
report, and it was still broken.  Jonathan's message made me remember
this problem, so I tried it again just now.  The problem is now fixed,
but now they have an interesting cosmetic problem: When you hit #, it
says "please enter another number now."  If you enter one that's not
on the authorization list for the restricted card, it correctly tells
you that "that number is not valid."  But, if the number is valid, it
just says "five?" then connects your call.  The intonation is as if it
is asking me a question -- I guess it is not too confident that "five"
is what it should be saying :-)


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 93 23:45:01 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Non Availability of 800/NXX


Upon reading John D. Gretzinger's posting on 800 NXX's to be protected
from assignment for portable 800 numbers, I noticed a new Canadian
(Stentor) 800 prefix, namely 739, which I haven't heard before. All
the other prefixes are accounted for in Canada, except the new Unitel
575 NXX.  Availability of Unitel 800 service is yet to be announced.

Now take a guess as to what 739 can spell on the North American dial,
other than the word REX ...

Meanwhile, Stentor (formerly Telecom Canada) has been proceeding
towards 800 portability if documents from Bell Canada's 1992
Construction Program Review are any indication. From this information,
it appears that Stentor will have its own database and will
co-ordinate this with the U.S. 800 database.


[e-mail]   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 11:40:17 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Dan Boehlke)
Subject: New Position:  Director of Telecommunications


Greetings,

Please post this to the TELECOM Digest.  Thanks for your help.  If
anyone has any questions, they can contact the school at [phone]
(the campus switch board.)  Please feel free to post this on any other
appropriate mailing lists or groups.  If you plan on applying for this
possition, apply quickly, time is short.


Dan Boehlke                    Internet:  [e-mail]
Campus Network Manager         BITNET:    [e-mail]
Academic Computing
Gustavus Adolphus College
St. Peter, MN 56082 USA        Phone:     [phone]


        DIRECTOR OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS

    Gustavus Adolphus College invites nominations and applications
for the new full-time position of Director of Telecommunications.
Gustavus Adolphus College is a coeducational, private, residential,
national liberal arts college of 2300 students that employs over 500
highly talented people.  The College is located in historic St. Peter,
one hour southwest of Minneapolis in the scenic Minnesota River
Valley.

    The Director of Telecommunications will be responsible for
providing leadership in the development and implementation of all
programs, policies, and procedures related to the Telecommunications
Office.  Also, the Director will manage the telephone system and
student resale billing system.

    The College seeks an individual with strong written and oral
communication skills and demonstrated abilities to work effectively
with a wide range of groups and individuals; good organizational
sense, management skills, and demonstrated leadership ability;
knowledgeable of FCC regulations which are applicable to a nonprofit
institution of higher learning.  The candidate must possess a college
degree and have five or more years of relevant experience in the area
of telecommunications, preferably a Northern Telecom system and
preferably at an institution of higher learning.  Also, experience in
using and maintaining a database using computerized resale billing
system is required.

    The search committee will begin its review of applications
July 2, 1993, and will continue until the position is filled.  Persons
wishing to be considered should send a letter of application, resume,
and the names, addresses, and phone numbers of three references to:

    Director of Telecommunications Search Committee
    Office of the President
    Gustavus Adolphus College
    800 W. College Avenue
    St. Peter, MN 56082

It is the policy and practice of Gustavus Adolphus College to provide
equal educational and employment opportunities for all.  We
specifically encourage applications from women, members of minority
groups, and persons with disabilities.

------------------------------

From: Eric Dittman <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI F&F Scam
Date: 19 Jun 93 06:50:01 CDT
Organization: Texas Instruments Component Test Facility


My fiancee and I recently moved in together and at her insistence had
the main number LD company changed to MCI (we kept my old phone number
as it is very easy to remember).  Since the main number was MCI, and
one of my brothers and my sister have MCI (though the brother is
switching back to AT&T because of the problems he's had with getting a
line through MCI in WV), I called MCI to get on the F&F program.  I
gave the MCI rep the names and numbers of my brother and sister that
have MCI, but told the rep I didn't want to list anyone else since I
knew they didn't use MCI and would not want to be contacted to switch.
The rep said okay and didn't push the issue.

Yesterday I received the "Welcome to MCI F&F" letter that listed my
brother and sister as people that have been added, and my mother as
someone that has been contacted about switching to MCI to take
advantage of F&F!  The letter had her name and number both listed
correctly, so I called MCI and complained.  The rep I talked to this
time said they didn't have any idea how this could have happened.  I
told them it looked like someone took the list of long distance calls
I made since switching to MCI and added my mother from that list.  The
rep apologized.  I told the rep I wanted my complaint sent up the
line, which he said he'd do (but I don't expect that anything will be
done).

I then called my mother and told her that as soon as she gets a call
or letter from MCI about switching to send a letter back telling MCI
what happened and demanding a written apology from them.  I also want
to make a formal complaint to the appropriate regulatory agency.
Would this be the FCC?


Eric Dittman                  Texas Instruments - Component Test Facility
[e-mail]    [phone]
Disclaimer:  Not even my opinions.  I found them by the side of the road.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 12:02:23 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Some Thoughts About Prepaid Calling Cards


In Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 387, Message 13 of 18
[e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist) wrote:

> Of course, there's the downside of pre-pay cards and Talk Tickets.
> Instead of cash being accepted everywhere, I'll soon have a card for
> the phone, a card for the cafeteria at work (already here; the vending
> machines don't take cash anymore!), a card for the subway, a card for
> this, a card for that.  There's only so much space in my wallet.  It
> wouldn't be bad if every pre-pay system could somehow agree on a
> standard format and share financial information.

Pardon me, but the major concern about the pre-paid cards is anonymity.
If you link the cards together, there's the genuine concern that it'll
be possible to:
- identify the user since so much information is available;
- track the user since one would see where one goes into the
   subway, buys candy, buys soda, etc.
(this privacy issues has already been discussed, particularly
with the supermarkets' discount cards).

There are already several ways to pay for things:
- use the native currency;
- use some cash/debit card (which is unfortunately linked to your
  bank account);

I have a card holder with three tickets in it that I use daily: the
monthly train pass for New Jersey transit, my PATH quick-card, and the
pass for the building.

Should any one card become invalidated, the others are not affected.
As anybody who ever had a credit card overdrawn can tell you,
separation of accounts is very valuable.  Things like theft have
already been discussed in TELECOM in the thread about the pre-paid
cards vs. calling card debate.

Yes, I agree that it's a waste for me to have $4 in Boston "T"
tokens and $3.75 on my Metro ticket which are totally unuseable
unless I'm there, whereas as a consolidated ticket would not let
my money go to waste.

Ah, but that's the incentive for all these tickets.  The "float" is
quite favorable to the issuer.  That's why the N.Y. Telephone "coin
replacement" card gives $5.25 credit for $5, and the bridge/tunnel/
turnpike tokens are discounted when purchased in entire rolls.  It's a
free loan until used.  Is it any wonder the subway system uses tokens?
Beside simplifying the turnstiles, buying tokens is essentially a loan
until used. (As an aside: turnstiles that accept magnetic cards are
being installed in many stations.  There's talk about issuing
commutation cards with lower rates for off-peak, etc.  I'll believe it
when I see it).

As to carrying too many cards, just ask them to make them thinner!
That's only half a smiley, folks.  I have a stack of bar coded check
cashing cards from damn near every supermarket near me since there's
no reciprocity of check cashing privileges, even with the same chain.
And talk about security -- I have three Foodtown check cashing cards
and even I don't know where they're valid!


Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 08:24:55 CDT
From: Robert Eden <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Talk Tickets Now Available Electronically


>I will charge your checking account automatically if you provide these
>details in email to me:

>   EXACT NAME as it appears on your checking account;
>   EXACT ADDRESS as it appears on check or in bank records;
>   THE CHECK NUMBER to be used for the purchase;
>   THE BANK ROUTING/TRANSIT and ACCOUNT number on bottom of check;
>   THE NAME OF THE BANK on which the check is drawn;
>   THE DOLLAR AMOUNT of tickets you wish to purchase.

This is <<VERY>> dangerous.  I have all the information necessary to
charge anything (at least talk-tickets) to anyone who writes me a
check.

All my other electronic transfer activities required written
notification (which I <<ASSUME>> was forwarded to my bank) permitting
them electronic access to my account.  I would hope that all other
transactions would be denied automatically by the bank.  If anyone can
enter a ACS transfer, we've in BIG trouble.

I'm not accusing Pat of doing anything wrong or illegal, but if he
could do it, what controls exist to prevent someone less trustworthy
causing havoc?


Robert Eden    817-897-0491                                 Glen Rose, TX
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station            [e-mail]
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ politicese for a nuke plant


[Moderator's Note: There are all sorts of controls in place. Your
written authorization is on file on my hard drive. If your bank asks
my bank for it, then my bank will ask me to forward it. If you were
one of the people who called me on the phone asking for Talk Tickets,
then I asked your permission -- on tape -- to tape record that part of
the conversation where we discussed your checking account and your
instructions. If Mrs. Jones screams that someone has looted her bank
account, the audit trail comes back here and points to Mr. Eden whose
tape recordeded conversation or email clearly shows Mrs. Jones' account
number was given out as his own. Mr. Eden then has problems. The banks
do not deal with me directly; they deal with my bank; or actually, with
the subsidiary company of the bank I use which accepts 'checks by phone'.
The process is almost identical to credit card processing by merchants
who are 'non-swipe'; that is, never in actual possession of the card
who work through mail and phone order. If the purchase was larger, then
I would send the Talk Tickets by registered mail and have your signature
on file to support the transaction; but for $15-20 it is not worth the
extra money.  By the way, I *again* depleted my entire inventory of
Talk Tickets as a result of order this past week; more will be here in
a few days.  If you would like to try these out, order some.  $15 for
ten tickets of $2 each;  good for calling anywhere, anytime, from any
phone via an 800 number, much like the Orange Card.    PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #403
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11579;
          19 Jun 93 18:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23647
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 16:45:43 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01669
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 16:45:13 -0500
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 16:45:13 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #404

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 19 Jun 93 16:45:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 404

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Call Forward-Busy (was Hunting) (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Dial-up IP Connectivity (Peter van Oosterom)
    NYNEX ISDN Hot Line (H.A. Kippenhan Jr.)
    International DA (John R. Levine)
    Advice Wanted on Voice Processing Card (Prab Goripathi)
    Seeking Video Signal Information (Darrel Herbst)
    Leach Zmodem ([e-mail])
    Unusual Behaviour of GTE Switch (Jack Decker)
    Germany: Collect Calls Are Back!! (Juergen Ziegler)
    Fastest Dialup Modems at 19,200 Baud? (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    What Dialing Plan For Illinois? (Carl Moore)
    Cell Phone Battery Source (Andrew Gerber)
    NPA 604 - Full? ([e-mail])
    AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial (Gregory M. Paris)
    More Strange International Rates (John R. Levine)
    Child Porn via Prodigy? (Carl Moore)
    Cross-Border Local Calling (David Leibold)
    Fax Driving Me Nuts (Mitch Wagner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 08:46:59 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Call Forward-Busy (was Hunting)


 Bob Sherman <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Try asking for busy signal forward. It along with no answer forward
> are offered by Southern Bell in the 305 area, so I would suspect your
> area has it also.

Oh the magic of breaking the language barrier 8*) When these words
were used, the rate of $9.00 installation and $1.00 per month were
quoted, a far cry from the original quote for hunting of $10.46 per
month. This requires specifying a specific line to forward to (my
second line) since this cannot be programmed from home (that would be
Call Forwarding).

Just FYI, the current Southern Bell monthly rate for Orlando is $10.30
plus $3.50 access charge (interestingly this apparently is *not* for
long distance but "The access line permanently connects your home or
office with our local switching office.") plus $1.00 touchtone service
or $14.80 plus assorted taxes for a single non-featured residential
line. The service plan is $2.50/month/ line, 900 and 976 blocking are
free services (all from the front of the "white pages").


Warmly,

Padgett

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter van Oosterom)
Subject: Dial-up IP Connectivity
Organization: TNO Physics and Electronics Laboratory
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 13:15:11 GMT


I'm posting this message for a friend who doens't have news, so please
react to his e-mail address: [e-mail] and not to this
group.

Hello netters,

We're a small organisation in the Netherlands that wants to set up
Internet connectivity. We intend to have dial-up IP connectivity since
this is probably the most attractive service for us.  However, we're
entirey Mac based and I'm not familiar with any products on Macs to do
things like:

- setting up a news server and clients (with NNTP support)
- setting up a SMTP mail hub, to be connected to our Quickmail server
- providing 'on-demand' set-up of external IP connectivity.

We have our Macs connected on an Ethernet and we're running Netware.
Our potential service provider indicates that they want to 'see' only
one IP-address for manageability reasons.

Who can give me some pointers / solutions and possible products?
Shouls we get a UNIX workstation or can we do without it?

Please react to:

Rene van den Assem,
[e-mail]
[phone] tel
[phone] fax


Thanks.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (H.A. Kippenhan Jr.)
Subject: NYNEX ISDN Hot Line
Date: 19 Jun 93 09:52:12 -0600
Organization: Fermilab Computing Division


A few weeks ago, someone posted a number for an ISDN hotline in the
NYNEX service area.  A project on which I'm now working would make
that number very useful; alas, I didn't save it.

If somone would be kind enough to repost it, it would be greatly
appreciated.

Alternatively, if any of the readership has specific information about
the availibility of ISDN Basic Rate service for: (212) 327-xxxx I
would be interested in that as well.  By Basic Rate Service I mean 64
Kbps and SS7 trunking from NYNEX to AT&T.

Thanks in advance for any help!


Best regards,

 H.A. Kippenhan Jr.               |   Internet:   [e-mail]
 National HEPnet Management       |   HEPnet/NSI DECnet:  FNDCD::KIPPENHAN
 Fermi National Accelerator Lab.  |   BITnet:       [e-mail]
 P.O. Box 500   MS: FCC-3E/368    |   Telephone:            [phone]
 Batavia, Illinois 60510          |   FAX:                  [phone]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 11:45 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: International DA
Organization: I.E.C.C.


 >I need to know a telephone Number in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. I can't
 >get the number by the local telecommunications-company's service.

> [Moderator's Note: Do you mean your local telco overseas service won't
> connect you with area code 403 information in Canada?  That seems odd.

The approved CCITT procedure for international directory assistance
has always been to have a bureau in each country with an enormous pile
of obsolete phone books from around the world.  Callers needing
international DA are connected to this bureau, where an operator looks
in the appropriate obsolete phone book for the city in question, tells
the caller that their party isn't listed, and hangs up.  (What do you
expect from a committee of PTTs?)  Generally, if they have a phone
book for the city being inquired about, no matter how old, they will
not call the foreign DA bureau just on the unlikely chance that some
numbers might have changed in the 20 years since the phone book they
have was printed.

The North American approach, which always calls the foreign DA bureau
is quite unusual.  In fairness, the CCITT approach would be better if
they had up to date listings, since it would avoid the language
problems often encountered between US operators who only speak English
and operators in Country X who only speak X-ish.  There is a little
book published by the CCITT of which I have a copy that I can't find
at the moment which has translations of key telephony phrases in seven
languages like "Attention operator, your party's call has been booked
for ... hours/days from now." but that isn't much help with
communicating people's names to DA operators.  (Hey, does AT&T use
their own Language Line service to deal with this problem?)

The easiest practical solution for the original question is for some
Telecom reader in Alberta to call local DA and e-mail the answer.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Prab Goripathi)
Subject: Advice on Voice Processing Card
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Fannie Mae
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 18:10:35 GMT


Hi! Folks,

Can anyone suggest a good PC voice processing card. I am looking for a
card that runs on a PC, low priced, reliable, has v-mail,fax-mail, DID
and call dialing. I would appreciate anyone's feedback.


Thanks,

Prab   email:[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Darrel Herbst <[e-mail]>
Subject: Seeking Video Signal Information
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 12:09:34 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University


Hello, I'm trying to get more information about Video signals, and I
was wondering if anyone could point me to the proper newsgroup, books,
etc.

Specifically, my questions have to do with NTSC vs. 70Mhz Analog
Baseband.  What's the difference, and why are matrix switches of these
two signals different, and in what respect.

If you have information as to books, and or sources, I'd greatly
appreciate email at : [e-mail]

Also, does anyone know of any Video Matrix Switches that employ ATM
protocol at this time?  I know of several LAN switch vendors that do
so, however, I'm looking to get Video signals switched via ATM.


Thanks in advance.

phone: [phone]  FutureVision of America Corp.
 Darrel Herbst : Lehigh University
 [e-mail]   215.758.1973

------------------------------

Organization: Purdue University
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 11:47:25 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Leach Zmodem


wCan anyone tell me where to find Leach Zmodem?

Thank you,

JWL

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 11:13:02 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: Unusual Behaviour of GTE Switch


I'm served by GTE (Whitehall, Michigan exchange) and have noted the
following unusual behaviour of the digital switch here (someone once
said it's a GTD-5, but I can't confirm that).

Anyway, if you do not have touch tone service, and at any time during
the dialing sequence the switch "hears" a touch tone, it doesn't just
ignore it ... instead, it does the equivalent of a mini-lockup.  If,
for example, you hit a touch tone digit and then proceeed to pulse
dial a number, it waits until it figures you are finished dialing and
then returns a new dial tone!  As far as I can tell, the same is true
if it "hears" a touch tone any time during the dialing sequence ... it
stops gathering digits entirely and returns a new dial tone a couple
of seconds after you stop pulse dailing.

It's also worth noting that this same switch will not accept pulse
dialing at 20 pulses per second, unlike most digital switches.  I'm
just wondering if this is simply poor design, or an actual effort to
foil people who might use tone-to-pulse convertors, fast-dialing
phones, or similar methods to achieve fast dialing without actually
purchasing touch tone service (with its associated monthly fee).  In
other words, is this a case of malice or stupidity?  Or, is it
something that's programmable at the switch?

If GTE is actually trying to foil the use of customer-provided
equipment, I think our Public Service Commission would take a pretty
dim view of that (judging from some things they have written in their
"opinions and orders" in the past).

I'm just wondering if someone who's familiar with GTE switches can
enlighten me about this.  I was ready to write off the inability to
accept 20 pulses per second to the subscriber carrier they've use
around here, but this business of turning off digit gathering entirely
if so much as a few milliseconds of touch tone is heard strikes me as
really odd.


Jack Decker | Internet: [e-mail]
Fidonet: 1:154/8 or [e-mail]
Note: Mail to the Fidonet address has been known to bounce. :-(

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 09:30:10 +0200
Subject: Germany: Collect Calls Are Back!!


You probably won't believe it, but the German TELEKOM will re-offer
collect calls after several decades of absence! Wow! The service is
great, but the rates are EXTREMELY expensive:

Operator charge/per call                    DM  9.50   USD 5.75
Operator charge for serial calls/per call   DM  7.50   USD 4.50
for all additional calls

Germany Direct Operator charge/per call     DM 11.00   USD 6.50

Connection charge/per minute (domestic)     DM  0.69   USD 0.41
(no night/weekend/... rates!)

But what makes this even more stupid: You can NOT make a collect call
from public phones, since these numbers (010, 0010) are blocked!

What are typical operator charges in the US or elsewhere?


 Juergen Ziegler.........  **  Internet: [e-mail].
 Obervogt-Haefelinstr. 48  **
 W7580 Buehl (Baden).....  **  .Secondary Mail address:.......
 Germany.[PLZ NEU:77815].  **  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: Fastest Dialup Modems at 19,200 Baud
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 12:36:39 GMT


Hello there from Milano, Italy:

Until a few months ago it was not possible to send/receive data over a
dialup line at a speed of more than 14,400 bauds (uncompressed), and
V32bis modems were the way to go. When data is binary (or ADPCM),
V42bis (or worse MNP5) would not help in achieving a better transfer
rate.

Just recently one company introduced modems (Plus series, I will not
mention the company here) with 19,200 bauds (uncompressed) speed
capability. They apparently use a proprietary scheme to achieve that
speed over normal dialup lines, besides all other standard protocols,
including V32bis and below.

What it seemed not-achievable a few months/years ago is reality now.
But where are the modem/DSP companies going now? Is there a
possibility to see even faster modems in the near future, do they
exist already, or have they reached already the fastest achieavable
speeds using all phone bandwdth?

Just curious to know, since I have know people with *huge* files to
transfer, and the only possible link is phone lines. No ISDN yet in
rural areas overhere in Italy.


 Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Bull HN Italia, I-20010 Pregnana Mil.
 work:     [e-mail]
 personal: [e-mail]
 phone:    [phone] / 8427 | fax: 8289

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 10:42:15 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: What Dialing Plan For Illinois?


I have just been to Chicago and Champaign-Urbana, Illinois (seeing Pat
Townson in the process), and I have not seen uniform dialing instruc-
tions in those parts of Illinois.  It is seven digits for direct-dial
anywhere within 312 and within 708 (apparently there is no "long
distance", just measured local, within 312/708?).

Illinois Bell pay phones in 815 (which area I go thru between Chicago
and Champaign-Urbana) were allowing 7D (no leading 1) for long
distance within 815.  But I needed 1 + 7D for this from Alltel pay
phones I found on and near Illinois route 1 heading north toward
Watseka, which is on U.S. 24.  I also noticed 1 + 7D needed at
Champaign-Urbana for long distance within 217.

In Chicago, the hotel I was at listed:

9 (2nd dial tone) and 7D for Chicago calls;
8 (2nd dial tone) and 7D for suburbs and long distance (sic) in 312;
this is apparently from before the 312/708 split, now 3 1/2 years old;
I used 8 (2nd dial tone) and 1 + 708 + 7D for a call to Arlington
Heights.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Gerber)
Subject: Cell Phone Battery Source
Organization: ParcPlace Boulder
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 17:22:25 GMT


 I recently got a cell phone and am wondering if there are any mail
order catalogs for cell phone accessories (batteries, chargers, etc)
which might be cheaper than my local dealers.  I have a motorola OMEGA
handheld with a 7.5V nicad.  Please email responses as I don't read
this newsgroup.


Regards,

Andy Gerber        [e-mail]
ParcPlace Boulder   [phone] x4212

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: NPA 604 - Full?
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 10:32:00 PDT


I got my phone bill yesterday, and it includes a chart, organized by
prefix, showing how much phone bills are going to increase later this
year. The chart shows that there are only a handful of NNX prefixes
( < 15) in NPA 604 not allocated. There are more gaps in the chart than
this, but it doesn't include cellular prefixes, or the handful used by
other phone companies (Prince Rupert and along the Alaska Highway).

There have been no announcements about an area code split, and though
we don't officially have NXX dialing, BCTel use NXX numbers for
service (mostly

811-xxxx). I'd expect a split before NXX, since there are still many
SxS COs out there in small towns.

Any other telecom folks know anything about this? The fact that BCTel
haven't told us B.C. people anything is not surprising; the area code
map in the brand new Vancouver B.C. white pages doesn't even show the
312/708 split.


.laura

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 14:02:17 -0400
From: Gregory M. Paris <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial


I can't figure out the AT&T "YOU WILL" commercial in which one segment
features a woman laden with grocery bags getting in her door using a
voice recognition system.  I can understand why someone would want
this facility, but does anybody want it provided by their long
distance company???

Following the same naming convention as "Call Answering," will this
service be called "Door Answering"?  I wonder if they'll charge a flat
rate, or will it be per door opening?  Will they charge more if you
leave the door open ($0.30 for the first minute, etc.)?  Will they try
to charge you more if you run a business out of your home?  If you're
late on your your phone bill, will they lock you out of your house?

Thanks, but I'll stick to lock and key for now.


Greg

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: More Strange International Rates
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 16:58:01 EDT


My new AT&T international calling guide, dated 4/93, just showed up.
It gives rates to all dialable countries.  Unlike previous guides, it
says nothing at all about non-dialable places, though on page 3 they
mention that only 200 out of 280 countries are dialable.

The guide is quite up to date.  If you have friends in Antarctica, you
can dial the Casey Base with code 672 12, Scott Base with code 672 24.
Some of the CIS countries have new country codes reusing the ex-East
German 37: Lithuania 370, Latvia 371, Estonia 372, Moldova 373.

For about half of the dialable countries, the per-minute rates on
operator assisted calls are different from those for direct dial.
Oddly, in many cases the operated assisted rate is less.  For example,
calling Syria at the day rate, direct dial is $2.95 for the first
minute, $2.37 thereafter, while for automated calling card it's
$2.95 + 1.75 calling card charge for the first minute and $2.17
thereafter, making calling card calls cheaper after nine minutes.

A two-page spread in the back describes ship and plane services.

The high seas operator is now at 1-800-SEA-CALL, $14.93 for three
minutes, $4.98/minute thereafter.  High Seas Direct service is direct
dial for $3.50/minute, but you need to buy a $1500 handset and modem
to attach to your SSB radio.  (I presume the modem goes on the ship,
but the language is ambigious.)  Info and assistance is at 1-800-392-2067.

Satellite service is also available for a flat $10/minute (or call via
MCI or Sprint for a low, low $9.99, eat your hearts out 1-900 scum).
The region codes are:

871 eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean
872 western Atlantic and Caribbean
873 Pacific
874 Indian

For ships, the region code is followed by a seven digit phone number.
For airplanes, the region code is followed by 5 and an eight digit
aircraft number.  For info, call 1-800-MARISAT for ships,
1-800-SKYWAYS for planes.

What kinds of airplanes have INMARSAT satellite stations?  At
$10/minute, I'm not inclined to dial random numbers and see who
answers.

In the back of the guide is an area code map that still shows 903 for
northwest Mexico as well as for Tyler TX.  Whoops.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 17:37:37 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Child Porn via Prodigy?


I came across a quote "The men were using the Prodigy computer
service, which links computer users through telephone lines, said (the
prosecutor)."  2 men are charged in Harford County, Maryland in an
alleged child pornography ring.  The quote was in the June 16
"Aegis" newspaper, published in Bel Air, Md.


[Moderator's Note: Poor Prodigy! Repeated allegations that they snoop
on people's hard drives; claims of email and newsgroup censorship; now
a claim they are used for the exchange of pornography. Actually they
must be getting pretty successful if they have this many complaints
about them going on.  :)   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:39:07 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cross-Border Local Calling


Here is a list of known examples where local calling is available
across the Canada-U.S. border. Note that there may be a few more
examples available.

Clair, New Brunswick        to Fort Kent and St Francis Maine
Edmunston, New Brunswick    to Madawaska, Maine
McAdam, New Brunswick       to Vanceboro, Maine
St Leonard, New Brunswick   to Van Buren, Maine
St Stephen, New Brunswick   to Calais, Maine

St Regis, Quebec            to Fort Covington, New York

Rainy River, Ontario        to Baudette, Minnesota

Coutts, Alberta             to Sweetgrass, Montana

Vancouver, British Columbia once had local calling to Point Roberts,
Washington, though that was mysteriously disconnected a few years
back.

Baudette, Minnesota is run by US West. It appears to be the only U.S.
exchange with a local call into Ontario (Bell Canada territory).

In Saskatchewan, the 926 NXX was protected to allow for local calling
to Portal, North Dakota. Which Saskatchewan exchange, if any, has
local calling to that location has not been determined yet.

Finding local calling areas in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba is
difficult due to the manner in which phone companies in those provinces
set up their telephone listings.

U.S.-Mexico border local calling likely doesn't exist. Information to
the contrary would be welcome, as would other news of international
local calling links.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mitch Wagner)
Subject: Fax Driving Me Nuts
Organization: Open Systems Today
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 16:52:46 GMT


I just picked up the phone after it rang and commenced swearing into
it a blue streak. The reason? For the past six weeks, some idiot has
been phoning me with his fax machine three or four times a day,
usually around noon on business days, interrupting my thoughts and
generally climbing right up to the top of my Pet Peeve Hit Parade.

Following a suggestion on this group, I've been trying to hook my fax
machine into my voice line so I could catch the pinbrain in the act.
But, since the instructions aren't exactly intuitive, I've been having
some difficulty doing it. Meanwhile, does anyone else have any
suggestions on how I can find out who's been calling me -- or at least
bring this annoyance to an end? The phone company, New England
Telephone hasn't been much help on this.


 mitch w.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #404
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12851;
          19 Jun 93 19:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23510
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 17:16:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06583
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 19 Jun 1993 17:15:36 -0500
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 17:15:36 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #405

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 19 Jun 93 17:15:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 405

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    France Telecom and IBM Launch Djinn (Jean-Bernard Condat)
    Ukraine (Kiev) Phone System (William Warner)
    Interactive TV at the Montreaux TV Symposium/Exhibition (Frederick Roeber)
    AT&T Traffic Problem? (Alan Boritz)
    Bell Operating Company Predecessors (A. Alan Toscano)
    Re: Southern Bell and Call Hunting (Mark Steiger)
    Phone Connections in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands (Thomas Hutton)
    Unanswered 800 Number Billings (Bob Schwartz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Chaos Computer Club France )
Date: 19 Jun 93 13:59:59 GMT
Subject: France Telecom and IBM Launch Djinn


 DJINN: the new French intelligent computer interface

Paris, France, June 19, 1993: France Telecom and IBM France have
teamed up for the first time to offer an innovative "communications"
personal computer known as Djinn.  The world's number four
telecommunications operator and the world leader in the computer
market have put their combined technical and marketing power behind
Djinn, a product whose state-of-the-art technology will make PC
communications as ubiquitous as desktop computers themselves.

Djinn is a fax, Minitel videotex terminal, answering machine and
powerful personal computer all in one.  The launch of this innovation
will drive development throughout the entire industry, since Djinn at
last creates direct integration of personal computer and
telecommunications environments.

Pre-development studies suring Djinn project have underlined a number
of important points:

   * Both professional users and consumers express spontaneous confidence
     in the quality of a PC-based telecoms product offered by France Telecom
     and IBM, two brand names with substantial "credibility capital";

   * The entire target population, from small businesses and professionals
     to managers in larger firms, expresses demand for both open solutions
     (acquisition of a single telecommunications device) and packaged
     solutions (telecommunications device bundled with a PC).

Consequently, both types of products will be marketed:

   * Djinn* is designed for connection to any PC equipped with Windows**.
     The product consists of a modem (developed by Com1) and software
     (developed by Integro) offering fax, Minitel videotext, answering
     machine and telephony functions.  The retail price is FRF3,990
     (excl. VAT);

   * The package product consists of the Djinn unit and an IBM PS/Value
     Point*** (386 SLC-25 MHz), sold for FRF12,000 (excl. VAT).

Both solutions will be sold by IBM dealers and by IBM's direct sales
network.

The Djinn unit will also be marketed by France Telecom subsidiary EGT
under the France Telecom Equipements brand name.

                              _____

* Djinn is a registered trademark of France Telecom.
** Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corp.
*** PS/Value Point is a registered trademark of International Business
Machines.

Djinn: A communications genie in every computer

Djinn is the first PC-based solution for the Windows operating
environment with a single application that integrates telephone
applications: fax, answering machine and videotex terminal.  The
combination of these functions in a single unit ushers in a vast
improvement in the daily working environment.

Djinn comes in a pocket format box (95 x 60 mm) and features extremely
simple software which takes full advantage of the flexibility of the
Windows user interface.  The solution is based on the use of an
external unit -- linked to the PC via the telephone network -- and an
innovative telecommunications application.  The application is
designed around the "telephone directory/ agenda", which manages the
different features.

Djinn users must be equipped with a telephone and a PC with Windows
(minimum configuration 386SX/20 MHz, 4 Mb RAM, 60 Mb hard disk, VGA
screen, DOS v5.0 and Windows v3.1).


Djinn features:

     DIRECTORY-AGENDA: UNIFIED PERFORMANCE

     The directory-agenda is a powerful "personal organizer" which
groups full information on individuals (telephone, fax numbers).  The
user simply clicks on the name of an individual to directly dial the
number and speak with the party to discuss a document on the screen
and then fax it, for example.

The directory-agenda also has an automatic calling feature and enables
access to services via the Teletel videotex hosts.

     ON-SCREEN TELEPHONE

     On-screen telephone use is simple and efficient.  Dedicated icons
enable automation of features such as appointment reminders, directory
assistance or optional services like call forwarding, three-way
conferencing, or call waiting.

     FAX TRANSMISSION HAS NEVER BEEN EASIER

     With the "quick fax" feature, a text editor is used to add a
message to a personalized header page and send it immediately.  The
fax selector function enables a document to be faxed from any Windows
application (word processor, spreadsheet, graphics, etc.) as easily as
launching a print job, with or without a cover page.

If the PC is connected to a scanner, documents not on the computer can
also be scanned and faxed.

Fax reception is active whenever the PC is on.  The user is notified
that a fax has arrived and can then check the fax reception status
log.

     ANSWERING MACHINE FUNCTION

     The PC also becomes an answering machine with Djinn, since the
integrated microphone allows recording of several different messages.
Messages left by callers are digitized and stored on the hard disk
(the computer must of course be left on to activate this feature).

     THE MARRIAGE OF MINITEL AND WINDOWS

     Djinn enables access to all Teletel videotex hosts, along, with
four streamlined adaptations for easy use of the railway and airline
timetable services, telephone directory assistance and Minicom
services.  All four services are transformed into full-fledged
applications.  For example, all information requests are grouped on
one or two screen pages.  For a train reservation on French national
railways (SNCF), for example, the screen shows the destination, date
and times, smoking/no-smoking seat selection, etc.  database
information requests are executed as background tasks, keeping the
computer free to run other applications.

Djinn also integrates the Teletel High Speed photo mode (4,800 baud).

     ONLINE USER SUPPORT

     A user support server provides downloading of software updates or
dedicated adaptation of server applications.  Djinn includes automatic
"click" access to the user support server.

Promotional campaign:

Market launch of Djinn will be supported by an advertising campaign
signed by France telecom in partnership with IBM.  The theme of the
campaign is: "When your PC becomes a fax, Minitel and answering
machine, it's not magic, it's Djinn" [Quand votre micro devient fax,
Minitel, repondeur ... ce n'est pas sorcier, c'est Djinn].

The campaign kicked off on June 10th and will be run in computer and
business trades, as well as in spezialized sector trades such as
medical, hotel of construction industry publications.


Djinn development parteners:

     COM1

     Founded in 1987, COM1 is specialized in the design and
development of telecommunications products.  The European leader in
the modem market, COM1 has manufactured nearly 300,000 modems.  In
1992 the company had sales of FRF90 million and sold over 100,000
modems.

COM1 is centered on its powerful R&D department.  Manufacturing
operations are carried out in partnership with Slectron.
Bordeaux-based Selectron is an affiliate of one the United States'
leading specialists in high integration electronics contract work.
Other manufacturing partners are Cotee (Merignac) and Sofrel (Angers).

France Telecom acquired an equity stake in COM1 in 1990 via its
Innovacom subsidiary.  AT&T Paradyne recently signed a technical and
marketing agreement with COM1 giving the company exclusive
distribution rights for its PCMCIA high-speed radio transmission
products (V32 and V32bis) for the EC, the former Soviet Union, Africa
and the Middle East.

Among the major accounts for which COM1 works are IBM France (and four
of its European subsidiaries), Toshiba, Apple and Hewlett-Packard USA.

     INTEGRO

     Founded in 1981, Integro is a French company with a number of
foreign affiliates (including subsidiaries in the United States and
the UK).  The company generates a significant percentage of its sales
- - which rose from FRF10 million to FRF60 million between 1988 and
1992 -- in export markets.  Integro currently has a work force of 100
persons, half of them involved in research and development.

Integro software products are designed to serve two areas of needs:

   * Progressive evolution from centralized to distributed information
     processing, enabling communications between workstations with these
     two different types of architecture;

   * creation of client-server architectures to guarantee total consistency
     between existing IT resources and focused on department and cooperative
     type computing solutions.


                         --------------

                         Jean-Bernard Condat
                          General Secretary
   >> Editor of _Chaos Digest_, the Frecnh computer security e-journal <<
     Chaos Computer Club France, B.P. 155, 93404 St-Ouen Cedex, France
          Private Address: P.O. 8005, 69351 Lyon Cedex 08, France
               Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone]
         InterNet: [e-mail]   or   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 19 Jun 1993 15:25:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Ukraine (Kiev) Phone System


I visited Kiev, Ukraine (of the former Soviet Union) for 10 days for a
friend's wedding.  Since there has been some discussion on the former
Eastern Europe phone systems, I thought the digest might be interested
in the telephone system.  (An aside, Kiev was quite enjoyable with
many beautiful cathedrals and really nice and friendly people.)

I stayed in one of the less expensive 'tourist' hotels: the Hotel
Peace (MIR).  Each room had a phone.  The phones were very poorly
built (even worse than some of the 'free' phones people were giving
away a few years ago.)  I am a very active person, and it was very
difficult to talk on the phone while standing perfectly still.  If you
moved, the phone would make a lot of noise from loose wiring somewhere
in the phone and bad cords, mine was taped in a few places.

Kiev has seven digit phone numbers.  All the phones were pulse dialed.
If you wanted to dial local numbers you just dialed the number.  If
you needed to do anything more complicated you dialed '8'.  This would
eventually, most of the time, connect you to another switch.  You then
could dial the rest of the country or internationally.  The Ukraine is
using country code 7 (the former Soviet Union.)

The local switch was very poor.  Most of the time you were either
connected to the phone you dialed or to nowhere.  But quite often you
would be connected elsewhere.  (This was somewhat fun, since my
Ukranian is very weak! It was interesting that the phone was answered
with a "Hello" or two.)  The most interesting feature (Someone who
knows phone switches might be able tell what kind of switch it was)
was when the phone would ring, and you answered the phone you would
hear a dial tone for a few seconds until the phone call was switched
through.

Kiev was full of public phones.  The public phones once required
Soviet Union 5 (I think it was five) kopeck coins, but now are free.

For emergencies, there were 00N numbers for the militia (police
style), ambulence and fire.  There were a number of signs around near
public phones that had the fire number in a red flame.  This was one
of the better signs I have seen, since it was obvious who to call in
the case of a fire.  (Now I am not as sure that the response to the
fire would be very useful.  My hotel was a relatively new building and
it had two fire escapes, one at each end.  My friend's wife's family's
house only had one exit running down the middle of the building.
There is no hydrant system in Kiev, and very low water presure.  There
are large trucks of water parked all around the city to provide water
in case of a fire.)

The Ukraine is having very bad inflation.  The exchange rate in
Decemeber was 300 koupons per dollar and when we were there in Late
April it was 3000 koupons per dollar.  Calls to the United States was
about 150 koupons per minute.  (Versus $1.50 to 2.25 per minute from
the United States to the Ukraine.)  An update, the telephone rates has
gone up about 25 times in the past couple of weeks, and are similiar
to our rates.

Another interesting telecom feature, was that the post office operated
FAX machines.  You could go into the Post Office send a FAX and pick
up any received FAXes had been received for you.  It is much more
reliable than the regular mail service especially for International
mail.  A few months ago the Post Office got a second FAX machine.

Now maybe someone can help me out:

I have been sending letters by FAX to a friend I met while I was
there.  I have better luck sending FAXes using ATT versus Sprint, even
though a call using Sprint sounds cleaner when you are talking.  Am I
correct in guessing that both ATT and Sprint would use the same
satellite connections to Moscow to serve the Ukraine, and the
difference is some sort of 'magic' to make the calls sound better to
people?  Also, even though my faxes make it there, I rarely get an
confirmation handshake between the FAX machines.  Also, when I receive
FAXes I often miss page breaks.  I have been planning to research how
FAXes work, but thought I would 'try the digest first!'


William "Bill" Warner, III (N8HJP)    [phone] (Toll Free in Ohio:
State of Ohio Telecommunications    950-1OHI, wait for tone, then 6-6683)
2151 Carmack Road
Columbus, OH  43221                     [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Frederick Roeber)
Subject: Interactive TV at the Montreaux TV Symposium/Exhibition
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CERN -- European Organization for Nuclear Research
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 13:32:33 GMT


Last Monday I went to the 18th International Television Symposium and
Technical Exhibition, in Montreux, Switzerland.  (Montreux and Geneva
are on opposite ends of Lake Geneva.)  Most of the stuff there wasn't
too related to comp.dcom.telecom, but there were some things that may
be interesting to cdt readers.

One of the hot big subjects today is interactive TV.  AT&T/Bell Labs
was showing a system they're working on.  The most visible part of it
is a "video rental store": by using a hand-held IR mouse, one could
select movies from various menus.  As you decided, you could see the
movie "teasers" in the corner of the screen.  When you selected one,
and confirmed the order, it would play the movie for you.  Though the
movie was being played over the net from their database system, it was
being played for only you: you had complete VCR-like control.  There
were some other game-like services, nothing earth-shaking, just slow
video games with movie-quality pictures.  There was also a quiet
demonstration of picture-phone capability.  I asked about multi-person
video games.  They said this system would have the capability to do
it, if anybody wrote one.

They and Viacom are going to run a test of this system in Castro
Valley, California.  They had a press release (contact me for a copy,
or for the contacts at Bell), but they weren't saying much else.

Microsoft and somebody I forget were also showing an interactive TV
capability.  They seemed to be focusing more on the "home shopping
club" audience.  They had a demonstration showing a clip from HSC, and
by using a mouse you could call up overlays with large buttons marked
"More Information" and "Order Now."  They also had a "virtual mall"
where you could click your away around the stores, click on things
drawn on the shelves, and click on "Order Now."

Both of these systems are intended to be used on a cable-tv network,
but one running a different protocol: something closer to a packet-
switching network.  The reverse communication channel would require
that all the CATV amplifiers be replaced with switches.  The
Microsoft/ whoever system could also work over satellite TV, with a
phone-line return channel.  Microsoft's partner company is already
involved (though VideoCipher) with pay-tv-via-satellite, so they might
also do a video-rental system.

There wasn't much else that was new.  There was only one other thing
that caught my attention: Thompson-CSF has come up with a way of
reading magnetic tapes optically.  The readout crystal is fixed and
the tape moves past it; this has a lot less wear than the current
spinning-head systems.  The working demonstration model they showed
had an optics package about the same size as the tape, though there
was a second version that was much smaller.  They plan to put the
optics into a small single package, like a CD player head.


Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research
e-mail: [e-mail] or [e-mail] | work: [phone]
r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: [phone]

------------------------------

Date: 19 Jun 93 20:05:44 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Traffic Problem?


I happened to hit an AT&T trunk busy calling a friend at the
University of Massachusetts via AT&T this afternoon.  Kind of unusual,
since UMass has a DS3 out of AT&T's switch in Springfield, MA, and
plenty of trunks. Would anyone else be experiencing, or observing,
this kind of blocking, or was this just a chance occurance?


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 19:09 PDT
From: [e-mail] (A Alan Toscano)
Subject: Bell Operating Company Predecessors


Today while walking from my office in downtown Houston to Houston's
former main Post Office, I passed by Southwestern Bell Telephone's
Houston-Capitol central office building, as always. Today, however,
for some reason, I glanced upward and noticed engraved into the
original part of building, between a couple of the upper floors, the
inscription "The Southwestern Telegraph and Telephone Company." (Note
that "Telegraph" comes before "Telephone" and not the opposite as with
American Telephone and Telegraph Company.)

As I recall, Illinois Bell Telephone began its life as The Chicago
Telephone Company, and kept that name for a time as part of the early
Bell Telephone System. I wonder if any Digest readers in the US might
know the names of the predecessors of other BOCs.


A Alan Toscano -- P O Box 741982 -- Houston, TX 77274 -- 713 216-6616
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Steiger)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 05:29:16 -0600
Subject: Re: Southern Bell and Call Hunting
Organization: The Dark Knight's Table BBS:  Minnetonka, MN (Free!)


 >I just called Southern Bell to inquire about call hunting for my two
 >home (residential) lines. Was told that it is available but the charg
 >is $5.23 per month per line involved (*not* the number of lines
 >rolled" - I asked about the main number rolling to the second only a
n>ot the reverse). Thus for me the charge would be $10.46 per month to
h>ave the single line roll-over (and I thought $7.50/month per line fo
 >Caller-ID was bad 8*(.

Hmm ... in Minneapolis, on a residential line it's under $1 per line.

 Origin: The Igloo BBS 612-574-2079  (1:282/4018.0)
Mark Steiger, Sysop, The Igloo BBS [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]   Fido: 1:282/4018  Simnet: 16:612/24


[Moderator's Note: And here in Chicago, standard 'hunting' is totally
free. No charge at all to have it on your lines.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 12:26:22 PDT
From: Thomas Hutton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone connections in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands


Im getting ready to head to Sweden, Norway Denmark and the Netherlands
with powerbook in hand and Im trying to get an idea of what type of
phone setup's I might find in hotels (mainly inexpensive hotels with
the exception of Novatel in Amsterdam).  I do plan on bringing a
modular to alligator clip cable. I've heard banana type jacks are used
in the Netherlands -- Is this correct?  Any other items I should be
aware of?


Tom Hutton  SDSC

------------------------------

Subject: Unanswered 800 Number Billings
From: [e-mail] (Bob Schwartz)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1993 15:33:07 -0700
Organization: Bill Correctors, Inc., Marin County, California


I recently came accross a mildly unusual instance of billing for
unanswered 800 number calls.

A Small Colorado company was *fortunate* enough to have their 800
number displayed for five minutes on national television. The result
was over 22,000 call attempts (actually began to seize up the CO) and
a bill for completed AND unanswered calls. The unanswered calls
totaled about $6,000.

Details: The "carrier" is a reseller. A call detail with most calling
line numbers was provided. A line in the provider's customer agreement
said something like, " customer must maintain adequate lines and
personnel ..."

My sense is that the billing is improper because the practice of
billing for unanswered calls was not disclosed.  Does anyone have
experience with this sort of situation?


Bob Schwartz                                       [e-mail]
Bill Correctors, Inc.   [phone]   Marin County, California

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #405
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18432;
          20 Jun 93 20:59 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16256
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 18:35:00 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06144
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 18:34:30 -0500
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 18:34:30 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #406

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 20 Jun 93 18:34:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 406

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG) (Andy Sherman)
    Spread Spectrum Microwave in Europe (Josh Backon)
    Modify DAA For Soundcard (Xiangyang Gao)
    How Many 5ESS Lines Are There? (Les Reeves)
    *6n Codes (Michael Schuster)
    Exchanges Using Zero as Second Digit (Thomas Chen)
    Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey (Richard Cox)
    Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey (David E.A. Wilson)
    Centel Warm Line Service (was Re: 411 Danger) (John R. Levine)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (Richard H. Miller)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (Carl Moore)
    Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting (Mark D. Fisher)
    Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting (David E.A. Wilson)
    Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting (Brett Frankenberger)
    Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
    Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
    Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID (Steve Forrette)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 13:20:52 EDT
Subject: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG)
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 6 Jun 93 22:05:40 GMT, [e-mail] (Rob
Levandowski) said:

> My brand new Practical Peripherals PM14400FXMT, which purports
> compatibility with Hayes' patented command set by license

Since Toby Nixon has left Hayes and probably won't set the record
straight on this one, I'll step up to the plate.  It is a popular
misconception that what Hayes has patented is the AT command set.
This is not true.  What Hayes patented was their technique for using a
single data stream for both the data and control channel for modems.
This technique involves the use of coded data in the data stream to
switch the modems into command mode.  (The example coded data stream
is, of course, silence for the guard time, followed 3 '+' signs in
rapid succession).  I don't think one can evade their patent by
choosing a different coded data stream, as the patent is on the
mode-switching method, not the particular triggers used in its most
popular embodiment.

To the best of my knowledge, the AT command set itself is not part of
this patent, but, of course, it is not real useful without a mode
switching technique.


Andy Sherman   Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Spread Spectrum Microwave in Europe
Date: 20 Jun 93 21:15:03 GMT
Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem


I'd appreciate getting feedback from European (especially those from
England, France, Belgium and the Netherlands) readers of TELECOM
Digest regarding the legality of using spread spectrum digital radio
microwave. In the United States one does not need an FCC license as
per FCC Rule 15.247 to operate this type of microwave link since it
has a very low power density spectrum and there is no need to
coordinate frequencies. Does your country allow one to operate this
without a license?


Josh    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Xiangyang Gao)
Subject: Modify DAA For Soundcard
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 09:14:54 -0400


Dear netters,

I would appreciate it if you could give me some advice.

I would like to interface my sound card to the telephone line.  I
would like to use the microphone input of the card to take input
signals from the telephone line, and the speaker output to send
signals to the telephone line.

I understand that I need to modify the DAA to get this.

My question:
Is there any product out there for this purpose?
How hard is the project of modifying the DAA, any suggestions?

Thanks in advance.


Frank

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 15:01:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: How Many 5ESS Lines Are There?


Saturday at approximatly 1 am one of the two 1AESS' in my serving
wircenter was cut-over to a 5ESS.  A huge banner was hung on the
wirecenter building Friday proclaiming:

"BELL SOUTH - Home of the 50 millionth 5ESS Line"

Break out the champaign!

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Schuster)
Subject: *6n Codes
Date: 20 Jun 1993 07:52:52 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Would someone please post a comprehensive list of the *6n special
diling codes (like the ones used for automatic dial back, busy
re-dial, and turning caller ID on/off)?

I realize these may differ in various areas of the country, but I'm
curious how many there are -- the local phone book lists =none=.


Mike Schuster   [e-mail] | [e-mail]
[e-mail] | GEnie: MSCHUSTER


[Moderator's Note: And in the process, the list should probably
include the 7n and 8n codes since there are quite a few of those also.
The 8n codes here in Chicago seem to be used mainly to cancel or turn
off their 6n counterparts (which turn on, or activate features.)  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Chen)
Subject: Exchanges Using Zero as Second Digit
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 14:44:29 GMT
Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc.


I used to think that zero and one in the second digit indicate that
the first three digits are the area code. Has that been changed or was
I wrong all along. My mobile phone and pager has a second digit of
zero: 9015255.


Tom


[Moderator's Note: You were correct in the past. Years ago, zero or
one were never used as the second digit in a prefix, and zero was
never used as the third digit in a prefix. Not only that, the same
prefix was never used in two adjacent area codes since to do so would
cause problems with local community (but inter-area code) local con-
venience seven digit dialing. As the number supply began running short,
all those rules were tossed out. Area codes still have zero or one as
the second digit for the time being, but a leading '1' is required to
indicate whether the tree digits following are an area code or a
prefix. Since cellular phones and pagers came along relatively late in
industry history, those services tend to be the big users of prefixes
with zero and one as the second digit. PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 11:07 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In reply to [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko), PAT said:

> Centel here in the Chicago area has another pretty useless offering
> called 'warm line'. Take your phone off hook and *do nothing*. After
> a few seconds of time out, some preset number of your choice will be
> dialed. I guess some people find it useful, but if I wanted a private
> circuit ringdown, I would just order one; those start ringing immediatly
> when they go off hook, not 10-15 seconds into a timeout.  I've never
> seen anyone offer this except Centel here in our area.  PAT]

It's a very useful service.  Not, of course, for you or for me but how
many of us with older relatives who live alone would not welcome a
facility which would allow said relatives to send out a call for help
just by taking their phone off hook and NOT dialing?  A Ringdown
line wouldn't work because (a) over here they cost too much, and (b)
it would prevent the line being used for other calls.  There are
rumours that this service may be offered in the United Kingdom soon,
but these rumours haven't been confirmed !


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail] - PGP2.2 public key available on request


[Moderator's Note: The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Or as the prophet said, "there is nothing new under the sun ...".
During all those long ago years of straight manual service, one of the
best features was the security aspect of being able to knock the phone
off the hook (or quietly lift the receiver off the hook) and leave it
that way so the operator could listen to the background noise in the
room and act accordingly. When phones were left off the hook with no
response from the subscriber, operators were trained to listen carefully
and call the police, paramedics, etc as needed.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 16:53:42 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: ......
> Centel here in the Chicago area has another pretty useless offering
> called 'warm line'. Take your phone off hook and *do nothing*. After a
> few seconds of time out, some preset number of your choice will be
> dialed. I guess some people find it useful, but if I wanted a private
> circuit ringdown, I would just order one; those start ringing immediatly
> when they go off hook, not 10-15 seconds into a timeout.  I've never
> seen anyone offer this except Centel here in our area.  PAT]

Pat,

About a year ago, I submitted an article to the Digest about the
Siskayou Telephone Company in extremely northern California.  One of
the special services that they offer is "Warm Line", defined just as
you state.

It seems to me that the service is useful for the infirm, who might have
trouble dialing a number in an emergency.

Hmmm ... I wonder if one could get Warm Line programmed to dial Operator?
I also wonder if you can still order Manual Service (Number Please?)


Ed Greenberg           [e-mail]        Ham Radio: KM6CG

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
Subject: Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey
Date: 20 Jun 1993 14:30:07 +1000
Organization: University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.


Here in Australia this is one of the 'EasyCall' options provided
byTelecom Australia. An interesting 'feature' of this is that you get
two codes, one to set the number you wish the call to reach and a
second to disable the auto-calling. Strangely, if you turn this off,
you still have to dial within the 10-15 seconds or else the dial-tone
changes to indicate that the call failed.


David Wilson              [phone] voice, [phone] fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong  [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 12:29 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Centel Warm Line Service (was Re: 411 Danger)
Organization: I.E.C.C.


> Centel here in the Chicago area has another pretty useless offering
> called 'warm line'. Take your phone off hook and *do nothing*. After a
> few seconds of time out, some preset number of your choice will be
> dialed.

I'd expect this to be useful as a sort of low-rent version of "help,
I've fallen and I can't get up."  So long as you can knock the handset
off the phone, presumably the person on the other end is a relative or
friend who will recognize the call.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Richard H. Miller)
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?
Date: 20 Jun 1993 17:03:59 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(David Breneman) writes:

> Reinhard A Hamid ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> In nearly all TV-Films I have seen, when people are giving out their
>> telephone number, it started with 555.

Actually, if you look at old films the practive goes back even further
than that. I remember quite a few movies in which the phone number
given was KL5-xxxx (or Klondike 5-xxxx). So the use of the 555
exchange seems to have been around for a long time.

(I can't remember specific movies but have memories of some of the
Maltese Falcon type of detective movies as well as ad posters on
public billboards as part of the background.)


Richard H. Miller                 Email: [e-mail]
Asst. Dir. for Technical Support  Voice: [phone]
Baylor College of Medicine        US Mail: One Baylor Plaza, 302H
                                           Houston, Texas 77030

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 08:38:30 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?


Last night my son and I went to see the "Last American Hero", a tried
and true formula movie that just happens to be hilarious (last time I
broke up in a movie was during the opening credits for "Monty Python
and the Holy Grail"). Drags a bit at the start and when delivering
"messages" but the incredible antics and the amazing bouncing '69
Bonneville have to be seen to be believed.

Nothing that hasn't been done before (the whole movie is a satire) but
I have never seen it done so well or so exaggerated with many of the
more bizarre antics done as throwaways in the background.

At one point The Kid is trying to convince "Jack Slater" that they are
in a movie and mentions that isn't it incredible that the millions of
people in greater LA all have a 555 exchange ? The response: "Area
Codes".


Warmly,

Padgett

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 12:06:19 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?


And what happened when people attempted those calls to 555 prefix from
Germany?

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fish)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fish)
Organization: College of Ones and Zeros, Georgia Tech
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 01:46:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Our esteemed moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: We went through this before, and I am almost certain
> the data is *NOT* sent as ASCII. Anyone remember my failed experiments
> at trying to get my modem to feed the data to my terminal?  It is some
> other format.  PAT]


As I recall the reason the experiments failed was that the modulation protocol
is not the same as is used for "normal" 1200 baud modems.

So the experiments didn't disprove ASCII. Also as I recall from the
data sheet that came with my sample Motorola CID chip, the info is
sent as ASCII.


Mark D. Fisher ([e-mail])
PGP Public Key available by request.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting
Date: 20 Jun 1993 14:32:31 +1000
Organization: University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.


> [Moderator's Note: Some time ago, I put a tap on my line; fed the
> modem from that tap; and had the modem in 'answer mode' at 1200 baud.
> I also gave the modem ATH1 to keep it off hook. All I could ever get
> was gibberish, apparently because I was expecting ASCII and instead
> the telco sent FSK. How would you hack the modem otherwise?   PAT]

This was probably because you used a Bell 212 modem and not a Bell 202
modem. If you did use a 202 then I would guess perhaps it is synch
rather than asynch character format.


David Wilson                [phone] voice, [phone] fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brett Frankenberger)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 18:11:56 GMT


[e-mail] (Dave Grabowski) writes:

> The Caller-ID signal is a standard Bell 202 carrier -- 1200 baud FSK.
> The data sent consists of six fields of information:

> 5. Data words: Month, Day, Hour, and Minute of message (8 bytes),
> followed by the calling number or "P" for private, "O" for out of area.
> All data is transmitted in ASCII.

> [Moderator's Note: Some time ago, I put a tap on my line; fed the
> modem from that tap; and had the modem in 'answer mode' at 1200 baud.
> I also gave the modem ATH1 to keep it off hook. All I could ever get
> was gibberish, apparently because I was expecting ASCII and instead
> the telco sent FSK. How would you hack the modem otherwise?   PAT]

FSK and ASCII refer to two totally different things.  FSK refers to
the modulation method used to get the digital data out on the analog
lines.  FSK = Frequency shift keying - its one of the simplest
modulation methods - one frequency for a "1" and another for a "0".

Youu modem was not likely expecting a 1200 buad signal.  Most
so-called 1200 baud modems use the bell 212A modulation standard which
is 1200 bits per second, but 600 baud (and 2 bits/baud).  It uses PSK
(Phase shift keying) not FSK.

(Even if you modem did use another 1200bps standard, that was FSK, it
might not involve the same frequencies as CNID data.  Also, CNID only
sends 150ms of carrier.  That's not enough for many modems to lock-on
to).

ASCII refers to the contents of the bit stream -- you can use FSK to
send ascii, FSK to send other types of data, something-other-than-FSK
to send ASCII, and something-other-than-FSK to send something-other-
than-ASCII.

If your modem is Hayes-compatible, then it requires ASCII for command
mode stuff, but for data, ASCII or not makes no difference -- its just
a byte stream.  (And, in fact, the meat of the CNID message is in
ASCII - your modem just showed gibberish because it wanted (probably)
600 baud PSK under the Bell 212A standard, and you were getting 1200
baud FSK under the CNID spec.


Brett  ([e-mail])  (formerly [e-mail])
Brett Frankenberger   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting
Date: 20 Jun 1993 16:34:30 -0700
Organization: W S Rupprecht Computer Consulting, Fremont CA


Bell 212 != Bell 202

If you had the normal garden variety 1200 baud modem you probably had
a Bell 212 modem.  (Bell 202 was something that was 5/8-duplex, if you
get my drift.)

Is it any surprise that MaBell picked an essentially non-standard
modulation for one of their products?  Nah.  They probably had bean
counter that wanted to get rid of a warehouse full of old 202 chips
for the last 20 years.  They finally saw a chance to dump them ... ;-)

The ASCII is encoded as FSK.  They are two different layers in the
protocol.


Wolfgang Rupprecht  [e-mail] (or) decwrl!wsrcc!wolfgang
IP: [140.174.88.1]  39469 Gallaudet Drive, Fremont, CA 94538-4511

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Wolfgang Rupprecht)
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID
Date: 20 Jun 1993 17:02:38 -0700
Organization: W S Rupprecht Computer Consulting, Fremont CA


> [Moderator's Note: What would you rather have, the Caller-ID provide
> the number of the interim party who had nothing to do with the
> transaction at all?

Programs and systems destroying information is always a bad idea.  Its
easy to arbitrarily drop one number of the other, but darn hard to get
it back and figure out what the other number was when you have to.

I'm surprised that CLID just send all the call info it has.  The final
presentation system is just ASCII.  It can just as well send:

orig: xxx-xxx-xxxx
forw: xxx-xxx-xxxx
forw: xxx-xxx-xxxx
forw: xxx-xxx-xxxx

That way if there is a long forward chain, one can see exactly who all
the parties are that are involved.  If somebody is up to no good,
there is no way of quickly telling which of the multiple parties is
being the prankster.  Just present all the available info and let the
human at the display figure it out.


Wolfgang Rupprecht   [e-mail] (or) decwrl!wsrcc!wolfgang
IP: [140.174.88.1]   39469 Gallaudet Drive, Fremont, CA 94538-4511

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID
Date: 20 Jun 1993 06:57:57 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Jack Decker) writes:

> In message <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
> Edu (Steven J Tucker) wrote:

>> Can someone tell me, when you forward your calls in a Caller ID
>> equipped area, does the called party get the original caller number
>> or the number doing the forwarding?

>> [Moderator's Note: Here in Chicago, they get the original number.  PAT]

> Isn't there some danger in this, though?  Let me give you an example
> of something that could easily happen:

> A is under a court order not to call or have contact with B (maybe a
> messy separation/divorce, or some such thing).  But A is calling C for
> some legitimate reason (maybe to try and collect money owed) only C
> doesn't want to talk to A.

[complicated story about A going to jail because of C's fowarding deleted]

> In my opinion, therefore, Caller-ID OUGHT to transmit some sort of
> indication that the call was forwarded via another number, if and when
> that is the case.

Strictly speaking, Caller ID does not, but the CLASS infrastructure
that supports it does transmit this information.  If you subscribe to
"bulk Caller ID" you can get all of the messy details (bulk Caller ID
is what you would get if you want Caller ID for trunk-side connections
like DID trunks, and cannot get regular Caller ID).  Presumably, Call
Trace will record all of the relavent information, since the
terminating switch has it anyway.  Some of the information that is
available with Bulk Caller ID and presumably Call Trace includes:

- Original calling number
- Original called number (the number that the caller dialed)
- Number of the line that forwarded the call to you (could be different from
  the original called number if there's more than one hop of forwarding)
- Reason that the last hop forwarded the call to you (immediate forwarding,
  busy transfer, no-answer transfer, etc.)

This is clearly enough information to prevent a false prosecution such
as Jack conjectured about.  (This information was taken from a
Bellcore document describing Bulk Caller ID).


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #406
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22671;
          20 Jun 93 22:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29679
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 20:21:46 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13828
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 20:21:08 -0500
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 20:21:08 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #407

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 20 Jun 93 20:21:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 407

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Names Added To Caller ID (Brett Frankenberger)
    Re: Names Added To Caller ID (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID (Mark Evans)
    Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID (Jason Garner)
    Re: Remember the War on Pagers? Try This on For Size! (Paul Theodoropoulos)
    Re: Remember the War on Pagers? Try This on For Size! (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: Caller-ID via Modem (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Caller-ID via Modem (Gary Breuckman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brett Frankenberger)
Subject: Re: Names Added To Caller ID
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 17:58:22 GMT


Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]> writes:

> The issue in Caller ID is not anonymity; it's privacy.  Let's take an

No.  It's strictly anonymity.

> example: Our esteemed Moderator.  Do you know his home address or
> telephone number?  I'll bet not; in fact, he has in the past pointed
> out that he is careful not to have a phone listed in his name, and to
> conduct business through a post office box.  He has in fact challenged
> people to determine this information about him.

I wish I had the time.  I'm quite sure I could find it out without too
much trouble.  (This is a valid pricacy issue; however, it has nothing
to do with CNID).

> Our Moderator presumably uses his personal telephone to create and
> post copies of this Digest to subscribers.  Were he to CALL
> subscribers directly, he would have to reveal his home telephone
> number though Caller-ID.  If we have the right to determine his
> telephone number in this case, shouldn't we also have it when he
> happens to use a modem and a terminal to reach us indirectly?

No.  He does not, directly, or indirectly, call me.  He does e-mail
me, and I do feel that I have the right to know his e-mail address
because of this.  (Actually, I read this in Usenet, so the only E-Mail
I get from Pat is his automated response to my postings, but the point
is, he doesn't call anyont directly or indirectly - he just leaves
them e-mail).

No one screams about how e-mail is a great invasion of privacy, but
everytime you e-mail me, I get your e-mail address.  (Yes, I know you
could probably forge an e-mail wouldout much thought process.  Same
here, but the point is, in general, E-Mail passes the source address.
There are ways around it, just as there are ways around CNID).

Once again, it's simple.  If you walk up to my door, I have the right
to know what you look like.  You do not have the right to anonymity,
and no one screams about how peepholes are a great invasion of
privacy.

When you e-mail me, I have the right to know your email address.  I
get this automatically, and you do not have the right to anonymimty.
Again, no one screams about the great privacy invasion of E-Mail.

Same for telephone calls.  If you call me, I have the right to know
your telephone address (i.e. your telephone number).  Its an issue of
anonymity, not privacy.  I fail to see why so many people make this
out to be a privacy issue.

I also realize that many will note, regarding the e-mail example
above, the relative ease with which e-mail can be forged by the SMTP
literate.  The fact that the system has holes doesn't make it any less
relevant.  CNID has plenty of holes also.

> Clearly not.  The "anonymity" our Moderator is maintaining is really
> his right to keep his private life private.  It is really none of our
> business where he lives.  None of us should be calling him at home to
> complain about missing issues of the Digest.

Nope, and he shouldn't be calling me at home to ask what I thought of
the last issue.  He doesn't.  He e-mails the digest to me, and I can
e-mail him whenever I want to.

> The analogous right applies to others.  When a disturbed person calls
> his psychiatrist's or social worker's number, he gets an answering
> service.  The message will be relayed, and the professional will
> return the call -- quite likely from home.  The home number will NOT be
> given out, for good reason: The professional has a right to his own
> life.  Only emergency calls should get through.  But, with Caller ID,
> as soon as the professional calls back from home, his number is
> revealed.

One example of a problem with CNID does not prove CNID is bad and
should be eliminated.

The professional can dial *67 if he is so concerned with his anonimity.

[ Part about poster's sister getting non-pub number to stop harrasing
caller ]

See, your sister had this problem, and it didn't have anything to do
with CNID.  But you still use it as an example of why CNID should be
eliminated.

[ Part about software engineer's home number being revealed deleted ]

> The outcome of these scenarios is clear.  Any doctor who gets
> harrassed after his home phone number is revealed will simply refuse
> to make calls after hours, to the degree he can.  The customer with
> the software problem will just have to wait, because someone else at
> some point abused a trust.  The world won't end, but it will be a less
> pleasant place.  But that's what you get when you sacrifice privacy.

I do not claim CNID is perfect.  You have identified some bad aspects
of it.  Keep in mind; however, that stalkings and the like have been
around much longer than CNID, and banning CNID will not solve, or even
make a dent in, the problem.  (And all these problems can be solved by
dialing *67 -- there are VERY FEW areas where CNID is avail and
per-call block is not).

Two other technical notes about CNID messages that appeared in the
Digest recently:

(1) I believe most telco voice-mail systems to NOT operate on the
basis of CNID information.  If my phone forwards to voice mail, CNID
will only provide the number of the person calling me -- the voice
mail processor would not know whose outgoing message to play or whose
box to place the incoming message in.  It may be based on SS7
information, but I believe it is communicated to the voice mail
processor using neither CNID nor ANI, but a separate protocol, that
also inlcludes information about how forwarded the call to the voice
mail box.

(2) Regarding the handling of forwarded calls with respect to CNID, I
believe if you have ISDN (yes, I know, most don't), the ISDN messages
include information such as whether or not the call was forwarded (and
maybe who forwarded it).  Also, note that having your number in my
CNID box doesn't prove you called it -- it just proves that someone
sent your number down a phone line in a CNID packet ... its not too
hard to forge (although it would require some equipment).


Brett  ([e-mail])     (formerly [e-mail])
Brett Frankenberger    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Names Added To Caller ID
Date: 20 Jun 1993 07:10:57 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In the case of Pat sending out Digests with his modem, he is not
invading my privacy, peace of mind, or anything else.  I have to
voluntarily dial in and retrieve my copies of the Digest.  When
someone calls me at home, however, they are causing me an involuntary
invasion of my privacy and/or peace of mind.  Were Pat to use his
modem to call me directly, I would expect to get his Caller ID
information.

> The analogous right applies to others.  When a disturbed person calls
> his psychiatrist's or social worker's number, he gets an answering
> service.  The message will be relayed, and the professional will
> return the call -- quite likely from home.  The home number will NOT be
> given out, for good reason: The professional has a right to his own
> life.  Only emergency calls should get through.  But, with Caller ID,
> as soon as the professional calls back from home, his number is
> revealed.

This is of course what blocking, either per-line or per-call, is for.
In what I would consider a proper implementation of Caller ID, the
free availability of per-call and per-line blocking solves all of the
problems: the people who want to have some privacy and peace of mind
for incoming calls can get it with Caller ID, and the people who have
a real or perceived need to keep their numbers private can do so as
well with their free blocking.  This way, everyone can decided what
privacy means to them.  Isn't privacy a "private" thing, something
each person should get to decide for themselves, instead of having
their PUC decide it for them?

Some people will sign up for per-line blocking because they never want
their number revealed.  Some people will not, but use per-call
blocking when a special need arises.  Most people won't order Caller
ID, so they keep things the way they are now (but still get to benefit
from the overall reduction in crank and harassing calls).  Some will
order Caller ID; of those, some will use it to prioritize calls, and
still answer calls from blocked numbers.  Some will choose to not
answer calls from blocked numbers.  Everybody gets to choose what
amount of privacy they want, for both outgoing *and* incoming calls.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 15:34:07 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Jack Decker <[e-mail]> writes:

> In message <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
> Edu (Steven J Tucker) wrote:

>> Can someone tell me, when you forward your calls in a Caller ID
>> equipped area, does the called party get the original caller number
>> or the number doing the forwarding?

> .... and Pat replied .....

>> [Moderator's Note: Here in Chicago, they get the original
>> number.  PAT]

> Isn't there some danger in this, though?  Let me give you an
> example of something that could easily happen:

> A is under a court order not to call or have contact with B (maybe
> a messy separation/divorce, or some such thing).  But A is calling
> C for some legitimate reason (maybe to try and collect money owed)
> only C doesn't want to talk to A.  Since A always calls C at around
> the same time, and since C knows about the court order, C decides
> to cause some mischief by forwarding his line to B.  A calls C, get
> connected to B, and upon hearing B's voice, hangs up immediately!
> BUT ... B has Caller ID and can "prove" to the court that A called
> her, so A gets thrown in the slammer.  C is happy, B is happy, and
> A's still wondering how the heck he got connected to B!

More likely it's C who might end up in the slammer.  I suspect that if
C intentionally forwarded A's calls to B, and knowing there was a
court order, he might be guilty of encouraging the violation of the
order.

In any case, how would B "prove" A called?  The Caller-ID box is not a
written record and is a digital representation; the information can be
faked and the box alone is not evidence.  What would be needed is the
tape of calls showing who called from the telephone company.  And that
tape should (I would think) show a call forward, in case C has message
units, so that he is charged.  Also, a call forward, if I'm not
mistaken, is charged to the caller so there should show a termination
at C and a transfer (charged to C) at point A.  Unless B conspired
with C to do this, B hasn't done anything wrong.  If C knew about it,
and did it for the express purpose of causing B trouble, there may be
legal penalties.

But if B's lawyer is stupid enough to allow a Caller-ID box alone, to
be used as evidence against his client without the telephone company
tape, B needs to get another lawyer and to sue his current one for
malpractice and negligence!

And as Pat notes, this is a little far fetched.  One phone call by
mistake is doubtful grounds to invoke contempt proceedings; the
speed-dialer in a phone is misprogrammed; the phone company loses an
upgrade of software and reloads the old software with old speed-dial
numbers, etc.  Also, there is the issue of what is used in civil cases
as "Mitigation of Damages" which means the injured party is supposed
to reduce, when possible, damages resulting out of an incident, e.g.
if someone strikes the side mirror on your car, you are entitled to
replacement of the mirror and reattachment; you are not entitled to
get the whole car repainted.

How the issue of Mitigation of Damages comes up is raised by this
question: If the Caller-ID box indicated who it was, why did the
victim answer the phone?


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID
Organization: Aston University
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 13:42:33 GMT


TELECOM Moderator noted in response to Jack Decker:

> [Moderator's Note: You devoted all these paragraphs to a justification
> of why simply passing the phone number of the absolute caller to the
> absolute receiver of the call 'might' be a bad idea ... if the very

How about simply putting some additional information in the Caller-ID
packet sent out to say that it is a forwarded call?  Maybe so that it
contains both the dialing number and a forward indicator (maybe X
forward indicators where X is the number of times the call has been
forwarded.)

> unusual scenario you describe should happen to take place. What would
> you rather have, the Caller-ID provide the number of the interim party
> who had nothing to do with the transaction at all?  Those are the two
> choices you have. I wish people would quit thinking up all these bizzare
> and unlikely reasons why Caller-ID is such a bad thing. Remember when

As for his claim that that the Caller-ID would be proof that A had
actually called B, simply taking the records for A's line, would show
otherwise. This information is likely to be in the billing data.  I
somehow don't believe that a phone company cannot produce this,
especially if asked to as part of evidence for a court case.

With a little co-operation between all appropriate telephone companies
it is quite simple to find out exactly what is going on and who is
responsible.

> the big thing was how all the women's shelters would never be able to
> have outgoing calls again because of all the angry husbands who would

Obviously they have never heard of outgoing only and unlisted lines.
Anyway what telco provides a "reverse assistance facility" mapping
numbers to addresses to the general public. To emergency services,
yes, but they have special procedures to verify that someone is a real
police officer or paramedic.


Mark Evans                       [e-mail]
+(44) 21 429 9199  (Home)        [e-mail]
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)


[Moderator's Note: Well there are plenty of 'reverse listing' or criss-
cross style directories available. Anyone can use them, although often
times a number will be skipped over if it is non-pub or one of the
back lines in a PBX group, etc. But the two objections heard for so
long in the early days of Caller-ID ('womens shelter' and 'business
will compile lists of callers and annoy me with telemarketing calls')
were just red herrings; none of the dire predictions came true. A
third objection ('attorney/psychiatrist cannot call from home because
client might get phone number') has required some effort by users to
overcome; I'm losing a lot of sleep because of it.  :)   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 02:04:32 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Jason Garner)
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID


However unlikely Jack Decker's scenario may be (A calls B which
forwards to C then A gets arrested while B and C celebrate) this would
be worthy of note as it pertains to a legal proccedings for malicious
or obscene calls.  For example, the next time I see fit to place an
obscene or malicious phone call I can rest assured knowing that if I
get caught I can call an expert witness who will attest to the fact
that the aforementioned scenario is POSSIBLE.  Then I will have my
attorney claim that I was not calling the party pressing charges but
someone else.  Thus, one of the major justifications for caller I.D.
(legal proof of a call in a criminal proceding) now becomes a tool for
the criminal defendant.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (paul theodoropoulos)
Subject: Re: Remember the War on Pagers? Try This on For Size!
Date: 20 Jun 1993 09:27:18 -0700


[e-mail] (Charles Mattair) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob
> Boudrie) writes:

>>> When the officer searched the suspect, imagine his surprise at finding
>>> a realistic looking, ersatz pager that turns into a FUNCTIONING .22
>>> caliber handgun (I guess about the size and range of a Derringer).
>>> The report was that it was dangerous, and available in convincing
>>> neon/day-glo colors to avoid detection ...

>> This report is utter BS.  <etc>

> This is not utter BS.  They had one of these little playtoys on the
> local news last week.  Kinda sorta like a fold up Derringer (sp?).
> Single shot .22 - I would suspect .22 short.

Well, this is belaboring the point, but again - it *is* BS, on the
following criteria:

1) the gun in no way resembles a pager - i've seen the photos of this
   gun in the newspaper. there *are* derringer _cases_ that resemble
   pagers. but the gun in question is not such. this is the typical
   case of a reporter who is totally ignorant about firearms listening
   to gossip and not doing any actual investigation.

2) these guns have been around a long time. they are not new. any
   firearms identification program for cops will include mention of
   same. as such, these news reports about this "new" hazard to
   cops/the public are misleading - and in my opinion - just designed
   to stir up public anti-gun parti pris. which is certainly nothing
   new either.

3) in light of 1) and 2), the connection to comp.dcom.telecom is
   vanishing at best, since they don't even look like pagers, and they
   aren't something new. in that regard, the report truly is "BS".

> Probably wouldn't kill you but still nothing to triffle with.

Try again. A .22 rimfire can kill you just as dead as a more powerful
round. Don't kid yourself.


paul theodoropoulos    [e-mail]    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: Remember the War on Pagers? Try This on For Size!
Date: 20 Jun 1993 08:34:34 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


The recent (mainline) news stories about guns hidden in pager cases
are referring to an -old- story.

As a paramedic in NYC I would see many of the various police bulletins
going to the precincts. The hidden gun/pager warning was distributed
oh, about three years ago.

Now what I'm really waiting for is a pair of sensible shoes of the type
used to dramatic effect by Lotta Lenya ...


[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 14:52:59 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call Waiting


Our Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: We went through this before, and I am almost certain
> the data is *NOT* sent as ASCII. Anyone remember my failed experiments
> at trying to get my modem to feed the data to my terminal?  It is some
> other format.  PAT]

You forgot that the signal is sent using Bell 202. Your modem does
Bell 212A (unless it's an old Apple-Cat 202). Bell 202 uses FSK
(frequency shift keying) modulation. That is, one tone for mark,
another for space.  Bell 212A uses phase shift modulation. They are as
incompatible as AM and FM radio.

So the data *is* ASCII. It's just the *modulation* that your modem
can't handle.


uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson
Internet: [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 08:12:41 -0700
From: Gary Breuckman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
Grabowski) writes:

> The Caller-ID signal is a standard Bell 202 carrier -- 1200 baud FSK.
> The data sent consists of six fields of information:
> Theoretically, you could hack a 1200 baud modem to monitor your
> phone line and receive CID information. However, you'd have to make
> sure that it didn't supervise the line, and it would have to ignore
> the fact that 99.99% of the time there wouldn't be a carrier present.

> [Moderator's Note: Some time ago, I put a tap on my line; fed the
> modem from that tap; and had the modem in 'answer mode' at 1200 baud.
> I also gave the modem ATH1 to keep it off hook. All I could ever get
> was gibberish, apparently because I was expecting ASCII and instead
> the telco sent FSK. How would you hack the modem otherwise?   PAT]

Sorry, you have the wrong type of modem.  The caller id is sent as an
FSK (frequency-shift-keying) signal, and requires a bell 202 modem
that understands that modulation scheme.  The modem you were likely
using was a 212 modem, that uses DPSK (dibit phase shift keying) and
is also full-duplex.

Also, you need to connect the modem to the line in a way that does
not take the line off-hook, some sort of capacitive coupling or
a high-impedance amplified connection.

Both of these modems use ASCII for the character scheme (actually,
it's the equipment connected to the modem that does this, but the
point is that the character encoding used is independent of the
modulation scheme (FSK/DPSK)).

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #407
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23807;
          20 Jun 93 23:09 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19635
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 20:55:35 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16304
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 20:55:01 -0500
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 20:55:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #408

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 20 Jun 93 20:55:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 408

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cross-Border Local Calling (Frederick Roeber)
    Re: Cross-Border Local Calling (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards (Norman Yarvin)
    Re: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial (Henrik Rasmussen)
    Re: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial (Bob Haddleton)
    Re: Telephone Question (Brian T. Vita)
    Re: Telephone Question (Mike King)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (Mark Brader)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (B.J. Guillot)
    Re: Headset Equipped Cordless? (Randal L. Schwartz)
    Re: 16550AFN Chip (Jack Winslade)
    Re: Some Thoughts About Prepaid Calling Cards (Gerry George)
    Re: Need Modem Lockout Circuit (Robert Berger)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Frederick Roeber)
Subject: Re: Cross-Border Local Calling
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CERN -- European Organization for Nuclear Research
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 13:53:57 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, David Leibold <DLEIBOLD@
VM1.YorkU.CA> writes:

> U.S.-Mexico border local calling likely doesn't exist. Information to
> the contrary would be welcome, as would other news of international
> local calling links.

People in the Geneva area can call the neighboring bits of France as a
local call, with a pseudo Swiss "area code."  It's not symmetric,
though: if I were to call from my home (in France) to a regular Geneva
or CERN number, I'd get nailed with some horrible international rates.

(The last I checked, it was cheaper to use AT&T's USA Direct
international setup (bouncing it to the states and back) to make the
10 or 15 km call to a building I can see from my back porch!)


Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research
e-mail: [e-mail] or [e-mail] | work: [phone]
r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: Cross-Border Local Calling
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 22:17:32 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> David Leibold <DLEIBOLD@VM1.
YorkU.CA> writes:

> St Regis, Quebec            to Fort Covington, New York

This would of course be the St. Regis Indian Reservation.  The Mohawks
who live there don't recognize the US-Canada border, so it's not
surprising that they have a special arrangement.  (This reservation
has been in the news lately, since the New York government lost a
court case over NY's tax on sales of tobacco products to the Mohawks
for the purpose of resale to New Yorkers.)

It surprises me that Derby Line, Vermont, is not one of the localities
listed here.  Derby Line is a town which is split in two by the the
US-Canada border (it is occasionally featured on television because of
this).  The story behind this town and others like it is a geographical
oddity.  When the boundary between Vermont and Canada was fixed after
the War of 1812, the treaty had it at precisely 45 degrees north
latitude.  However, because of a surveying error, the border was
actually constructed some half a mile further north, thus splitting
several communities.

When somebody actually noticed this years later, rather than disrupt
the towns which had grown up around the misplaced border, it was
decided to simply re-define the border to match its physical location.
(If you drive north towards Montreal from Burlington, as you pass
through the town of Highgate Springs in Interstate 89, you will see a
sign marking the 45th parallel immediately before the customs house.
Once you pass through, you will then wonder why the Quebec government
couldn't have extended Autoroute 35 all the way to the border ...)

According to my phone book, Derby Line is 802 873; unfortunately, I
don't have the phone book for that part of the state handy so I can't
check the dialing instructions for anything interesting.


Garrett A. Wollman   [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman      UVM disagrees.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 17:29:33 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Khee Chan <[e-mail]>, writes:

> Err ... I think you have missed out something here.

> During my last visit to the local Ralph's, I paid by credit card.
> True, I was not prompted to enter my PIN after I had run my card
> through the card reader.

In the Washington, DC area, the last financial institution to go onto
the MOST teller machine network was BCCI of Washington err I mean
First American Bank.  At that point MOST had 100% penetration of all
banks, credit unions and savings and loans in the Washington DC area
and surrounding counties, and probably all of Maryland and MOST :) of
Virginia.  With First Union and Nationsbank buying banks in this area,
the MOST network is extended all the way from New York City to Georgia
and possibly as far west as Tennessee or Ohio.

The reason stores in this area now take credit cards is that the state
of Maryland (and possibly the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth
of Virginia) no longer issue food stamp coupons.  Instead, they issue
a debit card tied into the MOST ATM network (the money ATM, not the
phone ATM :)) that all stores that take food stamps or credit cards
are a part.  This works as a debit card so the user punches in their
PIN.  This probably saves on fraud since the person charging something
must have both the PIN code AND the debit card.

Since they have the reader on hand to take food stamp cards (and, I
suppose, ATM cards, too) it is trivial to accept credit cards at the
same time.  Since this is a merchandise purchase on a credit card. it
uses the signature; if it is a debit purchase on a food stamp or ATM
card, it uses the PIN number.

The machines at Safeway use a special reader in front of the customer;
it has a four selection panel at the top, the usual 12-key pad in the
touch-tone form at the bottom, and a two-line LCD display.  When you
first start your transaction, it asks if you are using a debit or
credit card, then YOU are asked to swipe the card either way through
the reader.  (This, I suppose, makes fraud easier since you never show
the clerk the card, but stealing a weeks' worth of groceries is
probably not as serious a matter as stealing cash.)

It will call in and verify the transaction, and as a security measure,
it will verify on the display the amount you are to be charged and ask
you to confirm (or deny) this amount.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Norman Yarvin)
Subject: Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards
Date: 20 Jun 1993 15:13:59 -0400
Organization: Yale Computer Science Department


Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR) <[e-mail]> writes:

> Most grocery stores in central Ohio accept credit cards without PIN's.
> However one recently say they now require a PIN. This is a big pain
> and bothers me ... first why do I need to enter a PIN? No one at the
> store can tell me except its policy. No one seems concerned about the
> security of the transaction. I for one don't know my PIN nor do I care
> to. On cards that would permit it I specifically ask not to have a
> PIN.

> I also noticed on some of my cards that use of a PIN mean its a cash
> transaction instead of a purchase. This can mean a higher interest
> rate and/or surchare. If your paying off your card monthly this may
> not be a problem, but what about the millons who don't?

A cash transaction usually means interest is calculated from the day
you withdraw the money.  Check your credit card policy; this is the
case with mine, and I'd be surprised if anybody did it differently.
But when you make a cash transaction, you get the full amount of money
you asked for.  Whereas when you make a purchase, the store only gets
something like 98% of the money you "paid".  That 2% (the figure
varies between credit cards) pays for the interest during the 30 day
grace period as well as the costs of doing business of the credit card
company.

So, the reason stores would require a PIN is so that they get the full
amount of money; in the process they hit you with about a month's
worth of high interest charges.  If your credit card has say 15% APR
interest, these interest charges will be on the order of 1.1%; this is
less than 2% so the combination of (you+store) is paying less to the
credit card company than it would if you made a normal credit card
purchase.

We wouldn't need any of this funny business if stores were allowed to
charge more for credit card purchases.  It'd be easy for a computerized
store to charge exactly 2% more, and thus exactly recoup its costs.
But Congress in its all-seeing wisdom has passed a law against that
practice.


Norman Yarvin    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Henrik Rasmussen)
Subject: Re: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial
Date: 20 Jun 1993 16:55:24 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service


I believe the previous comments on this were tounge in cheek. I find these
ads very startegic for AT&T. They are, I believe trying to reassociate
their name with leading edge technology. This is probably smart since in
recent years they have been more associated with price wars.


   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 18:21 CDT
Subject: Re: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial


The "Door Answering Service" will not be provided by the AT&T long
distance , but rather by products and services from one or more of the
various AT&T businesses.  Remember -- AT&T is not solely Long Distance,
but also has many, many other product lines and services.  I don't
think anyone could keep track of them all.

The point of the You Will commercials is to show people the technolog-
ical marvels that people have been talking about for years, and
associate them with AT&T as a technology company, not just a Long
Distance company.


Of course, these are my opinions, not AT&Ts.

Bob Haddleton   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 20 Jun 93 09:23:33 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Question


> I have two jacks in my apartment on which it works fine; I also have one
> jack on which the touch tone tones won't break dial tone.

The old (original) Bell TouchTone (TM) phones were polarity sensitive.
Reverse the tip and ring leads (red & green) and your problem should
go away.

In some installations we used to deliberately reverse the leads to
restrict the dialing from a particular station.  I think that they
used to use a diode to prevent rotary phones from outdialing.

An interesting aside ...

One of the old theatres that I used to work in had the projection
booth phone restricted from dialing out.  Since I would occassionally
like to call out to order pizza, etc. I bridged a reed switch across
the diode.  When I wanted to call out, I retrieved the magnet stuck to
the bottom of my bench, held it up to the outside of the phone (just
outside of the portion of the case where the switch was located) and
made my call.  Whenever management would try the phone the magnet
would be back on the bottom of my bench and the phone clearly did not
dial out ... never got caught either!


Brian T. Vita   CSS, Inc.       CI$70702,2233

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 12:29:55 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Telephone Question


In {Telecom Digest}, V13, #397, [e-mail] (Charles R. Martin)
asks:

> I have an old Bell phone -- the good old kind, the ones that don't
> feel like they're made of papier-mache.  I have two jacks in my
> apartment on which it works fine; I also have one jack on which the
> touch tone tones won't break dial tone.  It also won't break dial tone
> plugged through my new 14.4K modem.

Try reversing the polarity of the wires on the jack that doesn't work.
Most of the older Bell phones don't have polarity guard.  Mine
doesn't.


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 20:31:08 GMT


As has been said, the point of 555-numbers is that they look like
ordinary numbers to the naive viewer, but really aren't.  Which
reminds me of a passage from Michael Chrichton's novel "The Andromeda
Strain" which, as far as I can reconstruct it from memory, is along
the following lines.  A character has just received the coded phone
message that he never expected to really happen, saying that an
emergency had occurred and the secret Project Wildcan is to be
activated ...

|   He pulled out of his wallet a business card.  The only writing
|   on it was:
|
|               Wildfire
|               Ext. 87
|
|   He wondered what would happen if he dialed the binary of 87.
|   He took a piece of paper and wrote out:
|
|       1     2     4     8     16    32    64    128
|       1  +  2  +  4        +  16       +  64         = 87
|
|       1     1     1     0     1     0     1     0
|
|   1-110-1010.  A perfectly reasonable phone number.

When I read this, I immediately deduced that wherever the novel was
supposed to be set, it wasn't the present-day USA.

Wrong!


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (B.J. Guillot)
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?
Date: 20 Jun 1993 19:06 CDT
Organization: University of Houston


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller) writes:

> Actually, if you look at old films the practive goes back even further
> than that. I remember quite a few movies in which the phone number
> given was KL5-xxxx (or Klondike 5-xxxx). So the use of the 555
> exchange seems to have been around for a long time.

I believe I've heard the Klondike used on the Simpsons or something
before, but I believe that "I Love Lucy" usually used Circle-x-xxxx,
etc.


Regards,

B.J. Guillot ... Houston, Texas USA

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Randal L. Schwartz)
Subject: Re: Headset Equipped Cordless?
Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 19:22:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Matt White) writes:

> Well, I don't know if they're still being made, but back when I used
> to be a sales droid at Radio Shack, they came out with a cordless
> headset phone.  Never saw one (they weren't released yet by the time I
> quit -- about summer of '89), but they may still be around (no
> guarantee on the sound quality, though ... the other models we used to
> have weren't too good).

I purchased the Duophone TAD-265 Cordless Telephone/Answering Machine
from Rat Shack about six months ago.  While I needed another answer
machine like I needed a hole in my head, the nice thing about this
system was a headset for the cordless part of the phone.  The optional
headset plugs into the very lightweight portable unit.  The signal is
very clear, so it must be the 900MHz flavor (a six-inch rubber
antenna).  I often find myself having a two-hour conversation while
wandering around my house hands-free, so the battery life is pretty
nice as well.

The answermachine, besides being remote-programmable, will out-call to
a selectable number or pager.  Alas, the outcall number is *not*
remotely programmable, so I'm stuck selecting one number before I
leave, and have left it as my pager number.  Outgoing message is in
RAM, with a tape backup, and the incoming message taking has all the
usual features.

I think I paid $179 for it, with another $15 or so for the headset.


Just another happy phone-call maker,

Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services [phone]
[e-mail] (semi-permanent) [e-mail] (for newsreading only)

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 23:07:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: 16550AFN Chip
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 31-MAY-93, Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr. writes:

> Again, almost all of this is due to sloppy programming and poor
> hardware design on the PC. Consider that machines like the PDP-11/03
> could support multiple DLV11-J cards (4 *unbuffered* 1602 UARTs) quite
> happily - and the PDP-11/03 was slower than the original PC. For that
> matter, when I was doing hardware design, I had a 4Mhz Z-80 system
> running six terminals at 19200 baud on a card with eight unbuffered
> 8251's.  And, in addition to running the serial code, that system had
> six copies of WordStar running!

Believe it or not, I have a working PDP-11/23 in the cellar with a
DLV11-J card and yes, it accepts data at 9600 fine.  Sure wish I could
program the baud rate by a method other than wire-wrap.  ;-(

Another old machine that I regularly use is a ca. 1980 Heath H-8 which
I use as a serial data analyzer.  It's an old, slow, 2 mHz Z80
(upgraded from 8080) and a four-port 8250 serial card.  Yes, the old,
slow, ca. 1980 8250 chips.

With a special cable, two of the ports will capture a bidirectional
19200bps data stream without missing a single character.

When I got the serial data analyzer idea, I first tried it on a PeeCee
clone and then on a 286 with a dual 16450 card.  Both failed
miserably, even when using two interrupt-driven receive buffers.  It
would regularly miss characters at 9600.

It's amazing that the old H-8 (which MeSs-DOS fans consider to be
beneath their dignity) runs circles around the Peecee systems.  The
H-8 is certainly not an exotic hardware design.  (Many of the CP/M
fans consider the H-8 to be one of the slowest of the popular
systems.)  It's just a sane implementation of off-the-shelf hardware
which proves to be more effective in this situation.


Good day.  JSW
Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1  (1:285/666.0)

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gerry George)
Subject: Re: Some Thoughts About Prepaid Calling Cards
Date: 20 Jun 93 23:49:01 GMT


Jeffrey Jonas ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Beside simplifying the turnstiles, buying tokens is essentially a loan
> until used. (As an aside: turnstiles that accept magnetic cards are
> being installed in many stations.  There's talk about issuing
> commutation cards with lower rates for off-peak, etc.  I'll believe it
> when I see it).

Last time I was in NYC, when I got off the Bus at the Port Authority
station I took the subway to my sister's.  I noticed that the subway
had card readers installed.  My first impulse was to see whether my
MBTA (Boston)'s 'T' pass would work, but I didn't think the subway
folks would take too kindly to attempts to "hack" their system :).  I
didn't for the duration of my weekend, although it bugged me something
fierce.


Gerry George   School of Management, Boston Univ.
Internet: [e-mail]   HomeNet: [e-mail]
Compu$erve: [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Robert Berger)
Subject: Re: Need Modem Lockout Circuit
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 01:28:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (JEREMY
GINGER) writes:

> Connect two Zenner Diodes (11 V) back-to-back in series with the lower
> priority line.  If you know the polarity of the wire you can get away
> with one Zenner.

I don't see how this can work. When you try to use the low priority
device, won't the drop in line voltage then turn of the Zener? It
seems to me that this circuit would oscillate between on-hook and
off-hook.

I believe you need some sort of latching device; the Radio Shack
version uses an SCR.

I have also seen a circuit that uses a four layer trigger diode (Diac)
in series with each device. This gives priority to the first device to
go off-hook.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #408
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28751;
          21 Jun 93 0:59 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11585
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 22:31:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31829
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 22:31:07 -0500
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 22:31:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #409

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 20 Jun 93 22:31:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 409

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Southern Bell and Call Hunting (407/904 Area) (Paul Robinson)
    Re: How to Tell if We're Really Saving Using Any Hour Program? (J Upchurch)
    Re: Cellular Publications (Henrik Rasmussen)
    Re: Fax Driving Me Nuts (Mitch Wagner)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones, One Number (Henrik Rasmussen)
    Re: Who Pays? (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Unanswered 800 Number Billings (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Request Info on Telecom Power Switch (David McKellar)
    Re: Lightning Strikes Evanston CO! All Service Knocked Out (Richard Nash)
    Re: CDMA Information Wanted (Sirbjit Birdi)
    Re: Nationwide CD-ROM Telco Lists Question (Bob Frankston)
    Withholding News (was: Remember the War on Pagers?) (Mark Brader)
    Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG (Mark Steiger)
    Re: More on Spuyten Dyvel - Misleading COs (Daniel Burstein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 17:02:19 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Southern Bell and Call Hunting (407/904 Area)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>, writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
> com (A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

>> I just called Southern Bell to inquire about call hunting
>> for (residential) lines... is $5.23 per month per line...
>> for me the charge would be $10.46 per month to have the
>> single line roll-over

>> Sounds like whoever was getting it free was really in a
>> friendly area.

Sounds like an area that is charging the equivalent of another phone
line for the equivalent of having a clerk do a one minute job of
entering a list of phone numbers along with the "do not hunt further"
bit on the last one, is living in a hostile area, which assumes that
someone is getting hunting on a residential line in order to not have
to purchase business lines.  50c to $2 is probably a reasonable
surcharge for this type of service, assuming it needs to be surcharged
at all.  Does the phone company ever wonder why large customers move
from Centrex to their own PBX with DID service?

It is arrogance like this that is going to encourage cooperative
telephone service.  A group of a four thousand people in a ten-block
neighborhood lease a PBX and have the phone company install perhaps
600 trunks.  They pay the PBX provider perhaps $5 a month each for the
lease, and they purchase maybe 200 incoming DID and 400 outgoing
trunks, and they take an entire prefix.  They split up the
installation cost over all 4,000 people over a three-month period, and
each user can enable or disable all the features he wants at very
little cost.  They hook up the AT&T, MCI and Sprint POPs right there;
these companies avoid having to pay the local phone company for
access; for all other long distance companies, the user is connected
to the local telco.

So the local rate for each of them might go from $25 a month down to
$14.  All of the usual features are available, e.g.  speed calling,
three-way, etc., no extra charge.  The phone company, instead of
getting 4000 residential lines at an average charge of $17, plus the
$3 a month "federal subscriber charge" or $80,000 a month now sees 610
trunks at $30 plus 10,000 phone numbers at $1 each plus perhaps
another $800 in local call charges, or $20,000 a month.  Further, the
PBX supplier can order the lines as T-1s with 24 trunks per circuit
and can deliver in band ANI in place of Caller ID without having to
pay $6 per line.

So, the users are charged $5 for lease of the PBX, $5 for the net
charges from the phone company, plus $4 per line to cover the cost of
having a repair crew on hand, and they get the following advantages:

  - Free calls inside their prefix;

  - Free access to the surcharged features: 3-way, speed
    calling, call waiting, call forwarding, call park, call
    transfer (ability to take a call, transfer it to another
    number and hang up; you are now able to place another
    call while they stay on the line (if it's a toll call, you
    end up paying the charge).

  - All of the blocking capability available with a PBX which
    is anything you can imagine: no 900, no 976, no long
    distance, USA only; no 10xxx, all outgoing requires a
    passcode, etc, while *still* being able to use their
    calling card; private calling card with rates equivalent
    to dialing from home, e.g. no surcharge, by simply dialing
    into the PBX and placing their call from it; these things
    can be programmed into the software, but the phone
    companies don't see making revenue on them;

  - Trunk usage sensitivity pricing: If I have a single phone, I
    can pay for use of one line.  If I use call waiting or
    call forwarding, I can  pay for use of two trunks; if I use
    transfer a lot, I can pay for as many trunks as I am using,
    according to usage.  Perhaps I only use call waiting for
    one hour a month.  I can be charged less than someone who
    has both circuits queued up for hours on end.

  - Charge Limits:  I can say that I expect to perhaps use
    $100 a month in phone calls.  Using a factor of 25c per
    minute in Long Distance, and $2 a minute for overseas, the
    phone can lock off when the limit is reached.  I could set
    my bill low, say $20; if someone tries something funny, my
    risk is set to what I can afford.  Note that I can still use
    my phone to make local calls or use my calling card which
    are separate.  I can set my long distance limit at zero and
    nobody can dial out to make long distance calls.  Incoming
    collect are still billed by the long distance company to the
    particular phone, so there's no problem.

  - More reliable service.  If I want, I can have the local
    phone company put in the cheapest residential line, and
    have the cooperative put in additional lines.  Now I have
    phone service from separate companies and thus I have
    redundancy (especially if one comes in from one side of the
    street and one comes in from the other.)

The failure of phone companies to implement the new technology that is
out there for callers, and to tariff and provide these services, means
that other organizations will be encouraged to move in and provide
what the phone company cannot.

Back to the issue of hunting.  The clerk from C&P Telephone of
Maryland informed me that if I wanted my residential phone lines to
hunt, there was no charge unless I asked for the hunt when I was not
having something else done to the phone, then it's $16.00 to file the
order, e.g. all they will charge me is for the order to install
hunting if it has to be placed separately; if the hunting order is
placed at the same time as something else, then there is no charge for
the order.

> Now here's my hunting question: What is the official name for the
> flavor of hunting that distributes calls evenly between all lines,
> instead of the regular behavior of starting with the first number,
> and giving the call to the first one that's free?

ACD - Automatic (or Automated) Call Distribution.  Stupido Airlines
sets up a 50-clerk reservation system, and its incompetent telecom
person, instead of ordering an ACD system, orders hunt group for the
50 lines.  As a result, pity the operator at console #1 who works
continuously all day long, and operator #50 who does nothing but
polish her nails for 56 minutes an hour!


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Just as this issue was being readied for release,
another reply from Brian Vita arrived adding further to the last point
made in this message:

> Try UCD - Uniform Call Distribution or ACD Automatic Call Distribution
> The alphabet soup between the Bells varies greatly. :-)
> Brian T. Vita   CSS, Inc.       CI$70702,2233

Except that ACD usually refers to an automatic call distributor, a
piece of equipment on the subscriber's premises which takes all
incoming lines (which presumably have already been manipulated in some
way or another by telco) and distributes them evenly to agents.  PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: How to Tell if We're Really Saving Using Any Hour Program??
From: upchrch![e-mail] (Joel Upchurch)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 18:50:50 EDT
Organization: Upchurch Computer Consulting, Orlando FL


[e-mail] (Michael Rosen) writes:

> How can I be sure our calls are being applied accurately to AT&T's Any
> House program?  I use Call Manager for my long distance phone calls
> and was told they would apply as well.  I don't know if I can tell
> whether or not the Call Manager calls are being applied or not.  If
> they are fit into the first hour of calls, are they omitted from the
> listing of calls made under the Call Manager code?

Your bill must be broken out differently from mine. My bill shows all
the long distance calls at the regular price, but only the in-state
ones show up on the subtotals. Then it does a separate calculation for
the calls at the Any Hour Saver rates. I find that AHS saves me quite
a bit, but I use about five or six hours of long distance a month.


(If your mail bounces use the address below.)
Joel Upchurch/Upchurch Computer Consulting/718 Galsworthy/Orlando, FL 32809
[e-mail] {uiucuxc,hoptoad,petsd,ucf-cs}!peora!joel [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Henrik Rasmussen)
Subject: Re: Cellular Publications
Date: 20 Jun 1993 16:17:50 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service


Another good publication that is more current is:

Mobile Product News
P.O. Box 5360
Pittsfield, MA 01203-9788

This is one of those "free to qualifying subscriber" type of publications.


Rik Rasmussen    Audiovox Corp.   Raleigh, NC

The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
  North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
     Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
        internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mitch Wagner)
Subject: Re: Fax Driving Me Nuts
Organization: Open Systems Today
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 16:12:36 GMT


[e-mail] (Mitch Wagner) writes:

> I just picked up the phone after it rang and commenced swearing into
> it a blue streak. The reason? For the past six weeks, some idiot has
> been phoning me with his fax machine three or four times a day,
> usually around noon on business days....

I think I've managed to wire up my fax machine so it will successfully
intercept fax calls while letting voice calls go through (with a
little help from my part).

However, since I did this the bozo hasn't called back, so I haven't
been able to figure out who it is.

I think now maybe I'll go out and plan a picnic to make sure it rains
on that day ... <g>


mitch w.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Henrik Rasmussen)
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones, One Number
Date: 20 Jun 1993 16:49:22 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service


I have customers who have had their phones cloned. They are very happy
with the results. The carrier should also be happy because these folk
are using more airtime since they are more reachable.


Rik Rasmussen   Audiovox Corp. Raleigh, NC

The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
  North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
     Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
        internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 15:50:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Who Pays?
Organization: Penn State University


In the area 814-237-xxxx (et al.), until they consolidated switches
onto the DMS-100, LEC-provided coin calls to the two local cellular
providers was free (no coin, or coin returned).  (No, I'm not making
this up.)


Pete

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: Unanswered 800 Number Billings
Date: 20 Jun 1993 22:35:43 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


I have an AT&T Readyline for my BBS that I use from L/D and for a
couple of friends and each month I get a listing of a calls to that
number and where they came from including the calling number. I get
bunches of 20 second and less calls which for the most part are
wrong numbers. I can call AT&T and get them removed as well as the
charges if they do add up to a chargable amount which in my case is
just a few cents.

But at first I had all kinds of them from New York and New Jersey
which I was told were people hacking for DID numbers they could use to
call out. I had the option to block the area codes, but after that
month they stopped when it was found out that there was no other lines
to use. If someone is charged for uncompleted calls that should not be
since mine are listed but AT&T has told me there is no charge for
those but are listed for businesses that need that information to
increase their incoming lines.


Steven Lichter    GTECalif COEI


[Moderator's Note: I am really not sure what you mean in your final
sentence above. What does 'a charge for incompleted calls' have to do
with 'businesses that need the information to increase their incoming
lines' ????    PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David McKellar)
Subject: Re: Request Info on Telecom Power Switch
Organization: Digital Media Networks
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 15:50:12 -0600


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> I was hoping someone here could help me. I'm looking for a power
> switch that I can control via DTMF tones ...

I saw an ad that read in part "Remote Booting for your BBS! $69 plus
$4 S/H per unit".  The company was Deltronix Enterpises at +1 714 380
8969 ext 2.

No endorsement here ... I just saw the ad on the same day as I read
David's question.


D a v e   M c K e l l a r   d j m @ d m n t o r . U U C P

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 08:10:05 -0600
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Lightning Strikes Evanston CO! All Service Knocked Out


In comp.dcom.telecom, article <[e-mail]>, TELECOM
Moderator wrote:

Most details deleted...

> .... and when it became obvious they were never going to get the
> CO back on line until they could get people to hang up their phones,
> the police began driving around the streets announcing this fact on
> the loudspeaker of the car: 'Please hang up your phones so that Bell
> can finish its work'.

> The local Evanston radio station also covered the outage for its
> duration and made this request, as did the Chicago stations. By 9:30
> PM the CO was back on line but the congestion was terrible; most calls
> from outside the CO would not complete on the first attempt until
> about an hour later. Quite the opposite of how Hinsdale was handled!
> Congratulations to the IBT people there who moved quickly this time!

Nice article, but I (as a telecom junkie), want to know what kind of
switch was hit?  If it was a DMS100, did they try placing the lines in
a precut condition to disable the lines from off hook requests?  Also,
I would guess that the extent of the damage was very minimal as it
only took two hours to re-boot the switch.  From the description of
the calls that remained up after the strike, it suggests that only the
front end mainly, got zapped, as the lines peripherals, cross
connected through the network continued to function.


Richard Nash     Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:            [e-mail]
Amateur Radio:   ve6bon.ampr.ab.ca [192.75.200.15]


[Moderator's Note: Details from Bell were very scarce. They had very
little to say except 'abnormal termination of service due to lightning
strike; employees repaired damage and rebooted switch; service was
restored in less than two hours after the incident ...'

------------------------------

From: Sirbjit Birdi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: CDMA Information Wanted
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 10:31:18 GMT


Ron "Asbestos" Dippold ([e-mail]) wrote:

> [e-mail] writes:

>> Does anyone know a good source for info on CDMA (Code Division
>> Multiple Access).  I would prefer something technical, but at this
>> point I settle for anything.

> To get the CAI (Common Air Interface) for CDMA as submitted to TR45.5
> of the TIA, you can ftp to ftp.qualcomm.com and cd pub/cdma -
> everything is gzipped postscript format (the gzip package is in the
> directory if you don't have it).

> I'm not sure what the TIA has published for public consumption, if
> anything.

Another place to try is the anonymous FTP site at tandem.com under the
/wireless directory!!

Look at some of the digest's there, they might contain some useful
info.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Nationwide CD-ROM Telco Lists Question
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 23:32 -0400


ProPhone does have a batch mechanism -- you can export arbitrary
chunks of data (slowly, however).

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Withholding News (was: Remember the War on Pagers?)
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 14:10:14 GMT


The Moderator noted:

> [Moderator's Note: I don't happen to believe the media has any right
> to withhold news on the basis that they think they know what is best
> for us. If they know something, they should report it.   PAT]

Pat, I think your present worries are addling your brain.  Freedom of
the press includes the right to not report something, with or without
a reason!  Now if you'd said that it was *improper* for news media to
take that action for that sort of reason ... then I'd merely disagree
with you, as a matter of opinion.


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The reason I disagree with you is because of the
special conditions we allow the press. In many jurisdictions, the sale
of newspapers is free from tax; the placement of newspaper sales boxes
on sidewalks is relatively unrestricted compared to other businesses
selling their goods on the public way.  We give the press access to
certain places the general public cannot go; to scenes of disasters,
press conferences with government officials, etc. We do these things
because we in the USA place a high value on 'freedom of the press'. It
is difficult to win a libel/defamation of character suit against a news-
paper for the same reason; we want the papers to be free to print things.
The trade off? The papers need to act in a responsible way also; and
to me this does not include withholding news on account of some people
may not like the report they read or withholding news in an attempt to
manipulate public opinion, etc. Perhaps though you are correct and the
term should have been 'it is improper, etc ..'   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Steiger)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 03:51:28 -0600
Subject: Modem Waiting for the BON
Organization: The Dark Knight's Table BBS:  Minnetonka, MN (Free!)


[e-mail] (Sven Damiano) wrote:

> Talking about the BONG, does anyone have the exact frequencies and
> durations of that tone? I guess it would be fun to play with that! :)

My modem recognizes the BONG.  You put a "$" in the dialing string and
it waits for the BONG.  It's a Practical Pheriperals pm14400fxsa
modem.


Origin: The Igloo BBS 612-574-2079  (1:282/4018.0)
Mark Steiger, Sysop, The Igloo BBS [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]  Fido: 1:282/4018  Simnet: 16:612/24

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: More on Spuyten Dyvel - Misleading COs
Date: 20 Jun 1993 08:30:30 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


NYC is composed of five boroughs, and about five years ago three of
them were moved form area code 212 to a new one, 718. A bit annoying,
but since the boroughs are distinct zones, it wasn't -too- confusing.

HOWEVER, they recently took one more of the boroughs into "718" (also
took all cellulars and pagers into a brand new area code, 917). The
Bronx is now in 718 land. All fine and good, but ...

There's a portion of what most people think is the Bronx, but which is
legally part of Manhattan.  There is a river ("Harlem River")
separating Manhattan from the Bronx. Or so it seems. But there's MORE!
The original course of the river in some areas was about a half mile
north of where it is now.

In more or less 1900, part of it was rerouted southward into the "Harlem
Ship Canal" and the old path was landfilled in.  The roughly square mile
of land in between the old and new riverbeds -looks- like it's part of the
Bronx, but is really part of Manhattan. (i.e., it's on the "Bronx" side of
the river, and it's physically contiguous to the rest of the Bronx, and
you have to take a bridge to get to the rest of Manhattan.)

THis gets us to telco problems.  The area ("Marble Hill") is covered by
the "562" exchange, based out of a CO located in the (main) Bronx. The
exchange also covers a lot fo the "real" Bronx.

NYtel has switched the entire exchange into 718, thus moving Manhattan
folk into the Bronx.  Those who understand the deal aren't happy.

Protests have been filed with the PSC and similar groups, and the
locals are hoping to keep 562 permissively dual-coded, so that either
212 or 718 will reach it.

BTW, this is fortunately a region where there is no problem with "911"
or other issues. It's just vanity ...


[e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #409
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02723;
          21 Jun 93 2:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26901
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 23:59:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05780
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 20 Jun 1993 23:58:39 -0500
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 23:58:39 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #410

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 20 Jun 93 23:58:40 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 410

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Germany: Collect Calls Are Back!! (Paul Robinson)
    Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Leech Zmodem (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting (Les Reeves)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (Tony Harminc)
    Anonymity (was: Re: Names Added To Caller ID) (Michael Covington)
    Solution to 411 Danger in NYNEX Land (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG) (J. Philip Miller)
    Future of ISDN (Colin Mcintosh)
    SW-56 Simulator (Peter Bachman)
    Old-Time Party Lines (Curtis Bohl)
    Purchase Suggestions: FAX Machine (Matthew Harttree)
    Costing Home Fiber Installation: Looking For Advice (Peter J. Scott)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 23:28:55 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Germany: Collect Calls Are Back!!
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Juergen Ziegler <[e-mail]>, writes:

> German TELEKOM will re-offer collect calls after several decades
> of absence! Wow! The service is great, but the rates are EXTREMELY
> expensive:

> Operator charge/per call                  USD 5.75
> Connection charge/per minute (domestic)   USD 0.41
> (no night/weekend/... rates!)

> What are typical operator charges in the US or elsewhere?

For calls within the U.S., they are usually about 22c/minute (USD
0.22) for calls within a state, and up to 25c/minute for a call from
Washington, DC to Los Angeles, about 2500 miles.  At night, the rate
is about 10c per call.  This is AT&T's rate; Sprint or MCI will
usually beat it by 1c per minute or so.

For a call via AT&T, not including any special discounts, this is the
rate I got from the AT&T operator:

The Collect rate for a call from the U.S. to Germany is as follows:

  For the first minute             $4.99
  Additional minutes                0.86

This is probably the rate during the afternoon because here are the
dial direct rates from the US:

  Weekends from 8am - 3pm          $0.37 first minute,
  each additional                   0.35
  All other times of 7am-1pm        1.77 / 1.09 each addl min
  All other times of 1pm-6pm        1.42 / 0.82 each addl
  6pm-7am all days                  1.15 / 0.65 each addl

Which means that a call to Germany on Saturday or Sunday running two
minutes at 2:59 to 3:01 will cost 37c for the first minute at 2:59 to
3:00, then 1.09 for the second minute (since it's in the new time
period).  A call of two minutes from 7:59 to 8:01 also on a weekend
day will cost $1.77 for the first minute of 7:59 to 8:00, and 35c for
the second minute.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 22:48:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


>> [Moderator's Note: This new feature has proven to be a
>> nuisance to administrators of phone systems (in hotels for
>> example) who find themselves getting all these 35 cent charges
>> from extension-users who made a call to 411, and got the call
>> connected that way without the PBX ever knowing about it.

> SNET offered to block the service on all of our lines for no
> charge, initially. After the start-up period, they would
> charge $21/per line to remove the service ...

> [Moderator's Note: But can you really imagine anyone paying
> $21 per line at some future point to have such a worthless
> feature re-enabled on their line just so they could pay
> everytime they used it?  I am sure for most people, once gone,
> that 'feature' stays gone.

Patrick, I think if you reread his quote, what I think he said
is that it is free to remove the service now, and later it will
cost $21 per line to remove the service later if you don't have
the *removal* done during the amnesty period.  They will probably
charge either way after the free period.

> Centel here in the Chicago area has another pretty useless
> offering called 'warm line'. Take your phone off hook and *do
> nothing*. After a few seconds of time out, some preset number
> of your choice will be dialed. I guess some people find it
> useful, but if I wanted a private circuit ringdown, I would
> just order one; those start ringing immediatly when they go
> off hook, not 10-15 seconds into a timeout.

This assumes you want a dedicated hot line.  I can think of a
half-dozen things this could be used for.  Remember Mrs. Fletcher?
("I've fallen and I can't get up?")  The computer dials out on the
phone line.  Well, the system simply picks up the phone and waits.  It
doesn't have to identify itself because Caller-ID can be used to show
who it is.  Yet you can still use the phone for calls.

Or I can set up an inexpensive form of alarm system by having it go
off line once every ten minutes and since the dialing is done by the
central office, a burglar doesn't know what number to call in to
prevent detection; if the line isn't siezed every few minutes, the
alarm company can go out and investigate.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 23:09:55 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Leech Zmodem
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


[e-mail] asks,

> Can anyone tell me where to find Leach Zmodem?

My question in part is, "Why do you want it?"

For the benefit of our readers who have never done file transfers over
the phone, Zmodem is a means of doing just that, and it has a nice
feature lacking from other protocols (except Kermit, which has much
higher overhead) is the ability in the event of a line hit, to back up
and restart from the error point.

On some BBS systems, if you download a file, you are charged by time
or bytes against your allocation for the file you have successfully
obtained.  How they are able to tell is that Zmodem sends a success
completion code when the file is transmitted okay.

Leech Zmodem is a "feature" someone developed to take advantage of the
restart capability to defeat being "charged" for getting a file; it is
the download equivalent of calling yourself collect and thus getting a
message across without paying for it.  While Leech Zmodem is probably
not "illegal" it's certainly rude.

Leech Zmodem -- after it does successfully get the whole file --
refuses to acknowledge receipt of the last block of the file by
continuously sending NAKs.  Eventually the other side times out and
assumes the file was not received, thus the recipient is not charged
for the file.  Ever since about 1990 or so, all versions of Zmodem
that Forsberg has released (DSZ) have "leach Zmodem defeat code" which
simply says if you have 99% the file received, failure to acknowledge
will not be accepted as failure to receive, e.g. you will still be
charged for the file.

My guess is that Leech Zmodem used the original Zmodem sources (which
are public domain) to change the end of file behavior to accept the
file but NAK its receipt.  If you want to test the behavior, you would
need to find some underground or pirate BBS, or write it yourself; I
doubt that legitimate ones would handle this sort of thing.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 22:27:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting


I doubt that the hardware involved in sending the Caller-ID FSK data
at 1200 baud interleaved with jingle juice uses any "old 202 chips ..
the last 20 years" suggested by [e-mail].  Not that there
isn't a warehouse full of 201,202,208,212, etc.

I continue to be amazed that my Caller-ID information arrives 95+
percent of the time intact!

Now they want to send this data in bursts while you are off-hook to
some sort of pre-ISDN display phone.  Is this progress?

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 23:14:05 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?


[e-mail] (B.J. Guillot) wrote:

> I believe I've heard the Klondike used on the Simpsons or something
> before, but I believe that "I Love Lucy" usually used Circle-x-xxxx,
> etc.

Wasn't it MUrray Hill 9-9099?  Numbers ending in 99 in SxS offices in
many areas reached a quiet termination.


Tony Harminc

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Covington)
Subject: Anonymity (was Re: Names Added To Caller ID)
Organization: AI Programs, University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 01:38:33 GMT


Telephone companies should not be forced to conceal the origin of the
messages that they deliver.

And that's what the anti-caller-ID people want.

It's a bizarre request.  It would make a lot more sense to require
message delivery companies to _reveal_ the origin of the messages.

Sometimes "privacy" gets carried too far.  Accidents of technology and
rapid population growth have sometimes given people an unprecedented
opportunity for anonymity.  Soon enough they begin to think of this
anonymity as every citizen's right -- which it isn't.

The only reason anyone even *thought* of objecting to caller ID is
that, for some decades, we had telephone systems that *had* to conceal
the origin of the messages, because it would have been unduly expensive
to do otherwise.


Michael A. Covington, Associate Research Scientist
Artificial Intelligence Programs      [e-mail]
The University of Georgia              phone [phone]
Athens, Georgia 30602-7415 U.S.A.     amateur radio N4TMI


[Moderator's Note: Remember also that until the telphone system was
automated on a wide-spread basis -- until dialing was the common way
to place calls -- who called whom was no secret. Sometimes from the
sheer volume of traffic handled, operators could not remember further
back than the last two or three calls they connected, but in slower
exchanges in small towns, etc the operators always knew what was what
and who called whom, etc.  If you came running into your house hearing
the phone ringing and got there after the party had hung up, a simple
request to the operator 'who was calling me?' produced the answer and
a connection to the (original) caller if desired.

One side-effect of the conversion to dial was that when a caller got
more than just a little distance from his starting place in the frames,
who he was got obscured. As the switch-train moved along through the
frames toward its destination -- or even out of the office to some
other office -- the caller's identity got lost in the matrix!  This
was not a feature AT&T devised to market 'privacy', it was just the
way the technology of the times worked. There was no longer any
convenient way for the operator or anyone else to tell who called
whom. AT&T was never happy with the fact that with the advent of dial,
the operators had to take the customer at his word when they asked his
number for billing purposes.

When Caller-ID was in the discussion stage a decade ago, lots of the
objections we hear now were brought up. Even back then, someone had
the 'womens shelter' argument as a reason the service should not be
provided. A top executive of AT&T pointed out that "... we are not in
the business of selling privacy ... we sell communications services.
We have never intended to hide the identity of the caller from the
called party ... it was a flaw in the technology that caused us to not
have that information conveniently at hand for many years -- not
because we chose to take sides with the called party or the caller. It
would seem people have forgotten that information was always available
before; and in their forgetfulness, the technology of our recent past
that we are now replacing has become, in their minds, the default ...
the telephone is nothing more than an extension of the human voice; it
permits the voice to be carried further and heard at greater distances
than without the use of the instrument. We are a common carrier; not
a regulator of the speech one person chooses to make to others. Just
as you speak with your unaided voice and bear responsibility for your
speech, so do you bear the same responsibility when using the telephone
to assist in speaking. We do not take sides ..." . A good point, no?  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 18:08:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Solution to 411 Danger in NYNEX Land
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


NYNEX also offers the "OCC" (Operator Call Completion) service for 411
calls, but now offers **FREE** blocking to remove it from your lines.
Perhaps the same USOC code that removes it here in MA will work in
other states such as NJ were recent posting indicate it is a problem.

When you dial 411 here in MA, you get whacked for 35 cents, but if you
let them dial the number for you, you get to pay ANOTHER 35 cents,
plus of course the call itself.

For those sites that must catch SMDR output and bill to hotel guests
or departments or whatever, there is NO indication available that
tells which calls used this 'service', and NO indication of the actual
number called. This is totally unacceptable in many situations.

When the Boston area hotels got caught buy this, they scheduled a
meeting with telco and the NYNEX Telesector Resources product manager
from White Plains flew in and was accompanied by her one man Boston
based staff member.

She seemed genuinely surprised that everyone was angry and noted ALL
the other telcos across the country where there supposedly have been
NO complaints. What slipped out in that and a subsequent meeting was
that in addition to Hotels being upset, some VERY LARGE Boston Centrex
users were unhappy and the service would be shutoff totally in some
Boston area exchanges until a permanent solution was available.

As an interim solution for the Hotels, at least, those using trunks
with DHL screening (0+ calls cannot be sent paid, but MUST be collect
or third party or CC billed) to comply with the 10xxx access
requirements could route all in-lata 411 type calls to those trunks,
and NO additional charges would be possible to the trunk. That worked
well.

DHL is 97 cents per line or trunk, and is 'special assembly' for
trunks. It is ANI "7" but they further subdivide it by the type of
user you are. The code the operator sees differs for prisons and
hotels and other categories, and the behavior of the screening seems
to differ, too. This is NOT a good solution for many users.

The 'final' solution is now here and has a USOC code of DKBXA. It is
**FREE** to get installed and **FREE** monthly. The local service reps
in MA have just been trained, and you should have no problem ordering
it. Have DKBXA installed on any and all home and work lines and you
won't have to listen to their 35 cent offer again.

The NYNEX product manager for this had done the usual marketing
surveys at great expense. I suggested she post here to c.d.t and she
would get BETTER answers and some candid user feedback really FAST and
totally FREE. She seemed genuinely interested, so just maybe we will
see her pop up here, as she has many other 'products' she wants to
offer in NYNEX land.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG) (fwd)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 22:14:40 -0500 (CDT)


> On 6 Jun 93 22:05:40 GMT, [e-mail] (Rob
> Levandowski) said:

>> My brand new Practical Peripherals PM14400FXMT, which purports
>> compatibility with Hayes' patented command set by license

> Since Toby Nixon has left Hayes and probably won't set the record
> straight on this one, I'll step up to the plate.

Not to disagree with anything that Rob says, but it should also be
stated that Practical Peripherals is owned by Hayes.


J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
   Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
    [e-mail] - [phone] [362-2693(FAX)]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Future of ISDN
Date: 20 Jun 93 08:37:51 NZST
Organization: Wellington City Council, Public Access.


I'm interested to know what people think is the future for ISDN?  Is
this the "best since sliced bread", or are there other services around
or coming out soon that will make it fade into the dimmed light of
history?


Colin McIntosh   Advanced Solutions Ltd   Wellington,  New Zealand.
Disclaimer:    What I say may not be what I think.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (peter bachman)
Subject: SW-56 Simulator
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 19:52:23 GMT


Anyone out there aware of a switched 56 simulator to connect up a
videoconferencing system for a demo. Would having a CSU-DSU do the
trick? I need some actual hands on answers.


Thanks,

[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Old-Time Party Lines
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 14:46:56 CDT


Does anyone know if there are still such things as ten-party lines
still in service?  I came from a small town in Missouri and our family
had a ten-party line until about ten years ago.  I went on a tour of
the CO once, and as it was explained to me, the phones on a ten-party
line used an extra ground wire to the instrument. Five of the phones
rang on different frequencies on one side of the line and five on the
other.  The switch was a Stromberg-Carlson installed in 1960.  At the
exchange, they decided which phone rang by attaching the connection to
a block with the correct frequency for the number.

Also, another small exchange next to us had a unique system, where the
switch rang all the phones on the party line, but with a different
combination of rings (1 short-2 long, etc.).  I learned about this
from a high school teacher who was awakened many times in the middle
of the night.

In the exchange where my grandmother lives, all phones on the same
party line started with the same six digits.  The last digit was the
number of the phone on the line.  This meant when you moved within the
exchange, you had to get a new number. I think that this was
eliminated a few years ago when they got another mechanical switch.


Curtis Bohl   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You are talking about a *long* time ago!   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Matthew Harttree)
Subject: Purchase Suggestions Wanted: FAX Machine
Date: 20 Jun 1993 19:51:38 GMT
Organization: ELON COLLEGE ACADEMIC COMPUTING VAX1


I am interested in purchasing a fax macine for use in my residence.

I have been using the fax/modem in my laptop but I really need a
dedicated fax that can handle light to moderate usage.

I am looking for something in the under $600.00 price range and was
wondering if any of you could suggest a reliable fax machine or ones
that I should steer clear of.

My main interest is the quality of output and if possible paper that
doesnt curl or need to be photocopied after being faxed.  I would like
to be able to send photographs and the like with some chance that the
other party would recognize the images.  I have used fax machines for
a while but I am really ignorant of the technology and the companies
that make them. (Maybe you work for one??)

Any suggestions from the net would be helpful.


Thanks in advance.  Please reply by e-mail.

Matthew Harttree         I speak only for my self.
[e-mail]   [e-mail] (Non-Elon stuff)
Admin of ECOPS   [phone]    #JCA/ECSD, Inc.'s hiredGun#

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter J. Scott)
Subject: Costing Home Fiber Installation: Looking For Advice
Date: 20 Jun 1993 21:14:12 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I'm looking for advice on how to find out what sort of prices are
charged for getting a private fiber-optic link to one's home for
Internet access.  I've heard that it's possible; what I need to know
now is how much it costs.  Obviously it'll depend on many factors;
let's say that I'm moving to a house one to five miles outside the
nearest (small) town in Northern California, for the sake of immediate
argument, not that there won't be many other issues to nail down.
Whom should I contact for more information?

[Anticipating a flood of "Please tell me what you find out" messages --
no need; I'll summarize to the same place you saw this, assuming I hear
something useful.]


Peter Scott, NASA/JPL/Caltech    ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: It won't come inexpensively, and unless your expected
volume of news and mail is going to be really huge, you will probably
wind up with a UUCP-style arrangement, calling on the phone as desired
to poll, etc.  Private, dedicated circuits of any kind -- fiber optic
or regular lead wires -- are seldom justified econmically unless you
can keep the line loaded, or in use virtually 24 hours per day. You
will also need to pay whoever provisions your Internet connection, in
addition to telco or whoever strings the circuit for you. Of course,
if you plan to get a full newsfeed -- or even most of the 'talk' groups
and busier news groups -- that might be the case considering how news
is these days. Usenet droids are quite prolific you know, especially when
when it comes to their imagined grievances on a variety of topics!  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #410
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07730;
          21 Jun 93 4:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21633
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 21 Jun 1993 02:08:33 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13209
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 21 Jun 1993 02:08:01 -0500
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 02:08:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #411

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 21 Jun 93 02:08:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 411

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    SW Bell (Texas) Telephone Solicitation Information (Len E. Elam)
    Data Port in SLC-96 (Yee-Lee Shyong)
    V42.bis Problem ([e-mail])
    [phone] --> The TV and Movie Madness Machine! (Lauren Weinstein)
    Interesting Use of ANI (Al Stangenberger)
    "Buyable" Specific Phone Numbers (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Unanswered 800 Number Billings (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID (Charlie Mingo)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (David Leibold)
    Re: MCI F&F Scam (Michael Rosen)
    900 Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland (Richard Budd)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (David S. Channin)
    Re: 6n Codes (Actually, Vertical Services Codes) (David Leibold)
    New Address For Talk Tickets; Other Commercial Stuff (TELECOM Moderator)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 15:54:58 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Len E. Elam - x32970)
Subject: SW Bell (Texas) Telephone Solicitation Information


The following was included in the latest telephone bill, recieved
6-17-93, which also included a $1.40 charge for a three minute,
evening, calling card call from a pay phone in Irving, TX to White
Settlement (Fort Worth), TX.  If I had to make alot of calls like this
(thank goodness I don't), I would be looking for a cheaper way to
call, such as the Orange Card or Talk Tickets.

Conventions: Normal text, [Bold Text], {Large Text}, {{Very Large
Text}}, <Symbol of some type>, * has been substituted for <round solid
bullet>.

                         ----------------

             {{[Telephone Solicitation]}}

     Texas law provides certain protections for a person who receives
a telephone solicitation at a residence.
     [A telephone solicitor must:]
* identify himself or herself by name;
* identify the business on whose behalf he or she is calling;
* identify the purpose of the call;
* identify the telephone number at which the person, company, or
  organization making the call may be reached.

     A telephone solicitor may not call a residence before 9 a.m. or
after 9 p.m. on a weekday or Saturday or before noon or after 9 p.m.
on Sunday.

     If a telephone solicitor uses an automatic dialing/announcing
device, the machine must disconnect from your line within 30 seconds
after termination of the call.

     [Exceptions:] The requirements above do not apply to telephone
solicitations made at your request, or solicitations made in
connection with an existing debt or contract, or calls from a
telephone solicitor with whom you have a prior or existing business
relationship.

     If you use a credit card to purchase a good or service from a
telephone solicitor other than a public charity (an organization
exempt from federal income tax under the Internal Revenue Code
<Section>501 (c)(3)), the seller must:

* offer a full refund for the return of undamaged and unused goods
  within seven days after you receive the goods or service (the seller
  must process the refund within 30 days after you return the mer-
  chandise or cancel your order for undelivered goods or services); or
* provide you with a written contract fully describing the goods or
  services being offered, the total price charged, the name, address,
  and business phone of the seller, and any terms and conditions
  affecting the sale.

     [Complaints.] The Texas Attorney General investigates com-
plaints relating to a violation of this law, which is found at the
Business and Commerce Code Chapter 37. If you have a complaint about a
telephone solicitor whom you believe has violated this law, contact:

     Consumer Protection Division, Office of the Attorney General of
Texas, P.O. Box 12548, Austin, Texas 78711, [phone].

     Another law, found at Texas Civil Statutes Article 1446c,
<Section>119 and <Section>120, requires a telephone solicitor to make
every effort not to call a consumer who asks not to be called again.
Complaints relating to a violation of this law are investigated by the
Public Utility Commission of Texas. If you have a complaint about
repeated solicitation from a telephone solicitor you have asked not to
call you again, contact:

     Public Information Office, Public Utility Commission of Texas,
7800 Shoal Creek Blvd., Suite 400N, Austin, Texas 78757, [phone]
or, [phone] teletypewriter for the deaf.

     {<Bell Logo> [Southwestern] Bell Telephone of Texas}

                     --------------------------


Who Am I?: Len E. Elam    Email: [e-mail]
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 01:55
From: [e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong)
Subject: Data Port in SLC-96


According to the manual of SLC-96, the interface of data port circuit
pack four-wire (Rx pair & Tx pair) is different with general data
communication interface (DTE or DCE)? Can anyone give me any advise
about this standard?

Thanks !


Apollo Shyong

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 20:09 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: V42.bis Problem


I have a problem with a Tandy 2400 baud modem I have purchased that
has RPI based V42.bis capability. I do not exactly know what that is,
but I assume it is an interface for V42.bis through software
interface. Anyway, I am unhappy with the software that was included
(MTEZ) and I would like to use TELIX or something like it. Is there a
way to interface the V42,bis capabilities through a FOSSIL driver or
something similar so that I can use software of my choice?


Thanks,

Ken

------------------------------

Subject: [phone] --> The TV & Movie Madness Machine!
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 20:43:14 PDT
From: Lauren Weinstein <[e-mail]>


Greetings.  In honor of the bygone days of telephone entertainment,
I'm pleased to announce that Custom Viewer's TV & Movie Madness
Machine is now available, 24 hours/day, on [phone].  This of
course is an ordinary phone number, so only regular phone charges (if
any) apply.

Callers will receive a randomly selected item relating to television
and cinema, including nostalgia, trivia, games, viewing suggestions,
and more.  Right now, the nostalgia element strongly predominates.  I
think I can say without fear of contradiction that most of the
materials on there now are things that you haven't heard anywhere for
at least 20 years -- if not longer -- or ever!  You'll fire up some
old neurons and relive memories you thought had faded away decades
ago.  Will you go running for your old polyester leisure suit or
bell-bottoms?  I certainly hope not.

Have fun.


 --Lauren--


[Moderator's Note: Thanks Lauren, for this great new service without a
premium charge for using it.  Everyone try it ... you'll love it! PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 20:51:36 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Al Stangenberger)
Subject: Interesting Use of ANI


A local newspaper is conducting a public-opinion survey by asking
readers to call 1-800-xxx-xxxx if their answer to a question is "yes",
and to call 1-800-xxx-yyyy if their answer is "no."  The number of
calls to each number will constitute the results of the poll.

The article notes that the system will automatically eliminate
multiple calls from the same number.  They must be getting ANI data
for their WATS lines and filtering out the duplicates.  I don't
remember seeing this done before, although it is a simple concept.


Al Stangenberger                    Dept. of Forestry & Resource Mgt.
[e-mail]          145 Mulford Hall - Univ. of Calif.
uucp:  ucbvax!ucbnature!forags      Berkeley, CA  94720

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 00:31:43 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: "Buyable" Specific Phone numbers
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Here in Washington, DC and surrounding areas, C&P Telephone company
will allow you, for an extra charge, to ask for a specific number if
it's in your area and not in use.  The charge comes in two flavors, a
fee every month or a one-time fee which is equivalent to ten months
recurring fee.

Someone who saw the discussion over charged and uncharged Hunt Groups
mentioned this feature and I thought I'd ask about it.

So, can I hear from people whose places do or do not allow someone to
pick their phone number, and if they do, what phone company is it and
what do they charge, if anything?  Please E-Mail me and I'll summarize.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Unanswered 800 Number Billings
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 00:19:53 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: I am really not sure what you mean in your final
> sentence above. What does 'a charge for incompleted calls' have to do
> with 'businesses that need the information to increase their incoming
> lines' ????    PAT]

I'm a bit confused by the poster's message too, but consider that the
call abandonment rate and the all-trunks-busy count are important
tools for the ACD manager in controlling the operation, in the areas
of lines, ACD capacity and personnel.


Ed Greenberg           [e-mail]        Ham Radio: KM6CG


[Moderator's Note: In a private note to me, Steve Lichter explained
what he meant, and it was basically what you are saying ... that the
number of busy signals tells a business it needs to get more lines
installed; telco charges for providing this data on busies, etc.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 01:30:32
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID


 Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> More likely it's C who might end up in the slammer. I suspect
> that if C intentionally forwarded A's calls to B, and knowing
> there was a court order [prohibiting A from calling B], he [C] might
> be guilty of encouraging the violation of the order.

A restraining order only restrains the subject of the order.  There
would be a severe due process problem in trying to prosecute someone
for violating an order, which s/he was never the subject of.

> In any case, how would B "prove" A called? The Caller-ID box is not
> a written record and is a digital representation; the information can
> be faked and the box alone is not evidence.

It doesn't have to be on paper to be a "record" (after all, data tapes
are frequently admitted).  Many/most caller-ID boxes keep a record of
last X number of calls.  Any records (including "data compilations")
maintained "in the ordinary course of business" may be admitted under
Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6), and similar state rules.

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?
From: woody <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1993 23:47:11 -0400


Considering that 958 and 959 are reserved NXXes in North American
Numbering Plan for special purposes, it's a wonder that movies don't
use these as artificial exchanges. One catch is that 958 is an actual
service exchange in the Caribbean (NPA 809) and strangely enough in
Winnipeg, Manitoba (NPA 204).

Now wonder what kind of fun could be had if movies showed off 976, or
area code 900 numbers, or even stuff like 212-940?

On second though, those examples are a bit too mean to play on an
unsuspecting general public :-0


David Leibold aka [e-mail] [e-mail] and now
on Internex (caution: internex.io.org may not be fully functional; mail
to that domain at your own risk)

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: MCI F&F Scam
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 05:06:39 GMT


My father received a call from MCI recently offering him some deal
(something like up to $4000 in free calls I think -- I'm foggy on the
exact details) for his office phone lines.  They said that they were
given his name by someone named Francis Kissinger who he supposedly
calls frequently.  He's never heard of this person.  He smelled a scam
and told them where they could put their deal (well, he didn't really
do that but it sounds good) ...


Mike


[Moderator's Note: Four thousand dollars in free calls? Gosh, if they
will put that in writing, even I will sign up with MCI.  :)    PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 20 Jun 93 20:17:09 EDT
From: Richard Budd <[e-mail]>
Subject: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland
Organization: CSAV UTIA


The United States has exported another product into the former Soviet
bloc: '900' services.  Glancing through popular magazines in Prague
and Wroclaw, Poland, I have seen advertisements for 'International
Party Line', sex line, and horoscope services.  Horoscopes have become
very popular here.  Even the respected newspapers in Prague have daily
horoscopes.

All the services originate in North America because the first three
numbers given in the advertisement are 001.  Those are the numbers you
dial in Poland and the Czech Republic to get an international line and
country code 1 (US, Canada, Bermuda, Caribbean).  The services in
Poland gave the area code as 612 (Minneapolis).  The number in the
advertisement appeared as 001 612 XXX XXXX.

However, today I noticed a 'Party Line' service which gave the telephone
number as 001 610 XXX XXXX.  Looking at the Telecom Archives, that is
an area code to be formed by splitting area code 215 in Pennsylvania.
Has that area code already been created and this is another interna-
tional service run out of Pennsylvania?

I'll keep watching for these numbers.  The advertisements appear most
often in the television magazines here.  The latest one here has an
in-depth story on the actress Sigourney Weaverova.


Richard Budd  | USA  [e-mail]    | CR    [e-mail]
              |      139 S. Hamilton St.    |       Kolackova 8
              |      Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 |       18200 Praha 8


[Moderator's Note: Actually, the '610' it refers to is the old home
for that code. It was used for years in Canada by the TWX machine
network (when x10 codes were all assigned to the Western Union Company
for use, and other-10 codes were for divisions of the USA where TWX
machines were concerned.)  A few years ago, WUTCO quit using those
codes and Bellcore took them back for general reassignment in voice
telephony with the exception of 610 which had to be held out from use
as an area code as long as the Canadian TWX network continued using
it. The 610 code was unreachable from international points (since they
have their own network conventions for calling Telex machines) and
mostly unreachable from North American phones (with the exception of
TWX machines here), so that seemed to make it a nice choice for use by
the services you mention. I do not know what is going on now with it
as far as potential conflicts with Pennsylvania is concerned, or for
that matter how it will conflict with Canadian <===> USA calls either
between voice telephones or TWXs.  Any readers out there know what is
going on where Canadian TWX use of 610 is concerned?  Are they going
to have some prefixes set aside while Pennsylvania gets the rest of
the prefixes (and the Europeans get a few for fone-fun), or has TWX
in Canada been moved off of 610?  And what about Europeans trying to
call legitimate 610 numbers in Pennsylvania?  Answers please!   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David S. Channin)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Date: 21 Jun 1993 05:43:55 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Radiology, Hershey Medical Center, Hershey PA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I just moved to the edge of Hershey, PA and called the local phone
office (United of PA) to get connected. The woman actually asked if I
wanted a party line! I wasn;t sure that I heard correctly so I asked
her what she meant. Just what I thought she meant. I chose a private
line obviously ($11.xx per month versus $9.xx for party line). Then
she asked me if I would be using "touch tone technology". I was afraid
to tell her that I have a T3000 modem using PPP to connect to the
Internet!

God, I thought I had moved to mars or something!  Wait till I ask
about OC3 ATM!!!


dsc

------------------------------

Subject: Re: *6n Codes (Actually, Vertical Services Codes)
From: woody <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 02:14:00 -0400
Reply-to: [e-mail]


The *xx codes used in North America are referred to as Vertical
Services Codes (at least mentioned in the Bellcore document on the
future of the North American Numbering Plan). Cellular services often
use *xx codes for use in promotional services such as free access to
radio stations or highway assistance lines.

Digest readers can pitch in to complete the following list of common
codes. When submitting a code (e-mailed to [e-mail])
please note the area in which the code is active (in case it's a code
that is set up within particular regions or services) and a brief
description of what it does. I'll collect anything else that comes in
and post a revised list accordingly. Don't send in any specific
cellular promotional codes, but any codes for special cellular
services like roam or forward will be considered.

Service                   tone   pulse/rotary
|--------------------------------------------
Call Trace                *57        1157
Call Screen               *60        1160
Call Return (outgoing)    *66        1166
Number Display Blocking   *67        1167  - valid for one call at a time
Call Return (incoming)    *69        1169
Call Waiting disable      *70        1170  - valid for one call at a time
Call Forwarding: start    *72        1172
Call Forwarding: cancel   *73        1173
Speed Calling             *74        1174
Call Return (cancel out)  *86        1186  - cancels further return attempts
Call Return (cancel in)   *89        1189  - cancels further return attempts


David Leibold   [e-mail]   [e-mail]
(internex.io.org not guaranteed to work just yet)

------------------------------

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Address For Talk Tickets, Other Commercial Stuff
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 00:50:00 CDT


In order to keep the Internet address for the Digest (and my personal
Internet addresses used mostly for administrative matters involving
the Digest) from becoming clogged with commercial stuff, friends of
the Digest have been most helpful in recent weeks by providing a 386
to be used for mail, and a network connection of my own.

Although TELECOM Digest in recent weeks became registered with the
State of Illinois and the County of Cook, Illinois as a licensed
not-for-profit educational organization (well, 'Patrick Townson
Associates, DBA Telecom Digest' if you want to get technical about
it), thus removing objections to the use of an Internet (or actually
an .edu domain) connection, it still made better sense to move the
functions not directly related to the Digest to a site of their own
for the sake of effeciency and to avoid the appearance of impropriety
where the sale and/or resale telecom services was concerned.  It
was different when there was only an occasional inquiry about the
Orange Card or 800 services; now there are several inquiries daily.

A few things on the agenda in the weeks to come include a new service
for our *international readers* ... you'll be able to make your calls
with *dial tone from the US* ... that is, you will call a local number
in your country, let it ring once and hang up. I'll call you back and
give you *dial tone from here in the states, at the rates we pay for
connections* ... I call it Telepassport, and it is being finalized now.
My associates at US Fibercom are helping pull it all together. Watch
for news in the Digest as soon as it is ready to go.

In addition, those readers who have purchased telecom services from
the Digest or given gifts to help with Digest production costs will be
invited to participate in a private mailing list for Friends of
TELECOM Digest.  This will be an occassional mailing keeping you up to
date on things pertaining to the day-by-day routine here. This list
will be administered at my new non-Internet site.

A long time down the road yet is Internal Revenue 503-c-3 status,
enabling the Digest to have tax-exempt status. That part is *tough*,
and right now, given financial circumstances, frankly isn't worth the
bother.

So -- for purchase of Talk Tickets electronically, requests for
information or customer service with the Orange Card, 800 numbers,
voicemail or other products and services offered by the Digest, please
note this new mailing address:

                  [e-mail]

My personal address on that site:  [e-mail]

DO NOT send articles or administrivia for the Digest there. Continue
to use [e-mail] for Digest submissions, etc. And my sincere
thanks go to the fine people who have arranged for me to have a site
of my own and the 386 to handle mail/news there.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #411
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09082;
          21 Jun 93 19:30 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22961
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 21 Jun 1993 16:55:31 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24865
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 21 Jun 1993 16:54:59 -0500
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 16:54:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #413

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 21 Jun 93 16:55:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 413

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Mark Eklof)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland (Haakon Styri)
    Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland (Georg Schwarz)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Bob Larribeau)
    Re: *6n Codes (Actually, Vertical Services Codes) (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Exchanges Using Zero as Second Digit (David G. Lewis)
    Re: AT&T Loyalty Program? (Michael Rosen)
    Re: How to Tell if We're Really Saving Using Any Hour Program?? (M. Rosen)
    Re: MCI F&F Scam (Bruce Carter)
    Re: Costing Home Fiber Installation: Looking For Advice (Lars Poulsen)
    With Phone on Hook, How is Caller-ID Transmitted? (Thomas Chen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 10:19:46 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Stonemarche Network Covp
From: [e-mail] (Mark Eklof)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines


In comp.dcom.telecom, article <[e-mail]>, someone
wrote:

> I just moved to the edge of Hershey, PA and called the local phone
> office (United of PA) to get connected. The woman actually asked if I
> wanted a party line! I wasn;t sure that I heard correctly so I asked
> her what she meant. Just what I thought she meant. I chose a private
> line obviously ($11.xx per month versus $9.xx for party line).

    At least you had a choice!  I just checked the phone book
here, and was suprised that two and four party lines are now marked as
being limited to "existing customers while remaining at their present
location."  When I moved to Milford, NH in 1985, the area was
expanding faster than NETel could keep up.  When I called for 'phone
service, I was told I'd be on a four-party line.  I asked if there was
any way of getting a private line, and was told no.  I declined, and
for the three months or so that it took NETel to catch up, used a
public 'phone at the store down the street.


Mark D. Eklof    Brookline, New Hampshire, USA   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 17:01:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu writes:

> Also, another small exchange next to us had a unique system, where the
> switch rang all the phones on the party line, but with a different
> combination of rings (1 short-2 long, etc.).  I learned about this
> from a high school teacher who was awakened many times in the middle
> of the night.

> [Moderator's Note: You are talking about a *long* time ago!   PAT]

As far as I know, all current switch software supports this. Only
difference is they now mostly sell both sides of the party line to the
same subscriber and call it "selective ringing, IdentaCall, SmartRing"
or some such cute name.


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer    Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l    Telephone: [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083        TeleFAX:   [phone]


[Moderator's Note: In other words, I am my own party-line neighbor. As
a kid, my good friend Dennis and his family were on a party line. When
he and I would chat, the conversation would turn, well ... it would
get to be the way kids talk to each other. Once we were talking on the
phone and there was a click ... not two clicks, mind you (one for
going off hook and a couple seconds later going back on hook) .. just
one. I told Dennis to be quiet, someone was listening to us. His ans-
wer? "Oh, that's just old Mrs. Jones; she has been our party-line
neighbor for years. If that old witch doesn't know what's going on
around here by now she never will ...". And he continued what we had
been talking about. Sure enough, five or ten minutes later, another
click when she had heard enough and decided to leave the line.

To make sure they did not miss a single word of the conversation, some
party-line snoops would set their phone in or on top of a galvanized
washtub or bucket.  Even though only one phone rang (of all the parties
on the line) when a call came in, the bell mechanisms on the other
phones on the party-line tended to 'click' as the current passed through
the line. That galvanized metal would amplify the 'click' sound the
phone made when another party on the line got a call; right away the
old biddies up and down the block would run in to the phone, lift the
receiver and listen silently to their neighbors. Some were even smart
enough to unscrew the mouthpiece so they could be completely silent.

Now I am my own party-line neighbor! :)     PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (YuNoHoo)
Subject: Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Norwegian Telecom Research
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 17:02:18 GMT


Richard Budd <[e-mail]> writes>

> The United States has exported another product into the former Soviet
> bloc: '900' services.  Glancing through popular magazines in Prague
> and Wroclaw, Poland, I have seen advertisements for 'International
> Party Line', sex line, and horoscope services.  [...]

> All the services originate in North America because the first three
> numbers given in the advertisement are 001.  Those are the numbers you
> dial in Poland and the Czech Republic to get an international line and
> country code 1 (US, Canada, Bermuda, Caribbean).

First, I really don't think they (Americans) should claim to be the
originator of this kind of '900' service. This stuff is well known in
Europe, and it's a method for generating traffic _into_ a country.
This would usually only benefit the network operators, but it's likely
that arrangements have been made between network operators and "good"
customers (those generating a lot of traffic into the network) to
split the profit.

A brief look in my local newspaper reveals numbers going to Hong Kong,
Surinam, and Australia. A single ad may have numbers to more than one
country, and offer the "service" in several languages.

Now, the interesting thing -- knowing the state of the economy in the
East European countries I wouldn't have been surprised to see services
in this countries advertised in the US and Canada. But the other way
round seems to be a bit weird. Can someone enlighten me?


Haakon Styri    <[e-mail]>  ***  std. disclaimer applies  ***

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Georg Schwarz)
Subject: Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland
Date: 21 Jun 1993 14:33:17 GMT
Organization: TUBerlin/ZRZ


In <[e-mail]> Richard Budd <[e-mail]>
writes:

> The United States has exported another product into the former Soviet
> bloc: '900' services.  Glancing through popular magazines in Prague
> and Wroclaw, Poland, I have seen advertisements for 'International
> Party Line', sex line, and horoscope services.

That's not only true for the former Soviet bloc countries; those
numbers are advertised here in Germany, too. Technically speaking,
they are not '900' services, though, because there is no extra charge
to the normal overseas call charges. These numbers are located in Hong
Kong, the Dutch Antilles etc. +1 610 is somewhere in the Carribean, I
suspect?  I've heard that long distance carriers in those countries
encourage setting up such numbers and advertising them abroad in order
to lure overseas calls from countries with high telephone rates (like
Germany!). They get half of the money (don't they?).


[Moderator's Note: I am not sure if they get half; they do get some
nice percentage of the take.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Bob Larribeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 07:10:18 -0700


> I'm interested to know what people think is the future for ISDN?  Is
> this the "best since sliced bread", or are there other services around
> or coming out soon that will make it fade into the dimmed light of
> history?

I have worked on ISDN CPE for almost eight years now; therefore I am a
proponent.  There are several points I would make:

1. ISDN is technically better than analog services for data - faster
transfer rate (64 kb/s vs. 28.8 kb/s for modems), faster call set up
1-2 secs. vs 30 secs for modems), much higher reliablility (go all day
without a hit).

2. ISDN is technically better than analog service for voice - control
multiple calls over a single line, many other supplementary services,
better voice quality.

3. ISDN provide a rich interface for computer control of calls.  You
go from Off/On Hook plus 12 tones to a packet based interface with
explicit status and control.

4. In the U.S. ISDN is priced competitively with analog services.  The
issues are deployment, i.e., can you get it where you want it, and
marketing.  Deployment will improve greatly this year.  Educating the
market will take more time, but it is happening.

5. There is no competition on the horizon for a competitor to ISDN to
deliver low speed switched voice and data service using a digital
interface.

6. BISDN is a long way away as a switched service.  The standards for
broadly deploying BISDN as a switched service apparently will not be
completed for another couple of years.  Even in a BISDN network I
expect to see the ISDN interface survive, particularly for voice
applications.  Even for data it will be a very long time before ATM
interfaces are provided to every home or small business.

7. I also believe that the Cable TV industry will use their digital
networks for entertainment applications and not seriously go after the
telcos voice and data markets on a general basis.

Hope this helps.


Bob Larribeau    San Francisco

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: *6n Codes (Actually, Vertical Services Codes)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 10:19 -0400


Number Display Blocking   *67        1167

As understand it, the correct name for "*67" is "Number Display
Lottery" which is as likely to unblock as to block. The odds of a
given number being already blocked are, perhaps, small but that is
compensated by the concern about CLID among communities of such owners
so that it is much more likely they'd use *67 and defeat blocking.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Call-Waiting
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 10:27 -0400


A reminder that the modulation of CLID has been discussed in TD in the
past.  It is not Bell 212 since there is no need for such an expensive
and complicated modulation scheme. One only needs to send a half
duplex datastream of a short run of copper which means that a simple
FSK would suffice. I don't have CLID so I can't check it out here, but
there are a number of 202 protocols that would suffice.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Exchanges Using Zero as Second Digit
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 14:29:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> the Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: ...Years ago, zero or one were never used as the
> second digit in a prefix, and zero was never used as the third digit
> in a prefix...

Pedantry mode: The "correct" term (according to BOC Notes on the LEC
Networks) for the "NXX" digits in a world zone 1 number of the format
"NPA-NXX-XXXX" is "Central office code", not "prefix".  A "prefix" is
a 0, 1, 00, 010, or 011 code (I think that's all of them) dialed
before an E.164 number which is not part of the number itself.  A 9 or
8 dialed for access to an "outside line" from a PBX or Centrex group
is also called a "prefix".

Just doing my part to minimize confusion ...


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation


[Moderator's Note: Just doing your part to add to the confusion around
here!  :)    PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: AT&T Loyalty Program?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 15:39:58 GMT


Is there somewhere in particular, besides AT&T's business number, that
I should call to sign up for this?  I tried calling 800-222-0300 the
night I read the post here on TELECOM Digest.  At first the operator
seemed to comprehend what I was talking about but then she started
going off about discounts of 25% to the one area code I dial the most.
This did not sound like the "loyalty program" described in the post to
TD.


Thanks,

Mike

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: How to Tell if We're Really Saving Using Any Hour Program??
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 15:57:47 GMT


upchrch![e-mail] (Joel Upchurch) writes:

> Your bill must be broken out differently from mine. My bill shows all
> the long distance calls at the regular price, but only the in-state
> ones show up on the subtotals. Then it does a separate calculation for
> the calls at the Any Hour Saver rates. I find that AHS saves me quite
> a bit, but I use about five or six hours of long distance a month.

I don't believe my bill shows a separate calculation for AHS calls.
I'll have to check the last bill and examine it closely.  It seems
I've been overpaying my parents though.  I've learned that the listing
of Call Manager calls is at full price and the discount is only
calculated in with the total amount on the first page.  Since I use a
Call Manager code to separate my phone calls from my parents' I'm
using the CM subtotal to determine how much I owe.  I'll have to call
and ask if this can be changed somehow.


Mike

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 10:53:49 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MCI F&F Scam


Greetings Pat, readers:

> My father received a call from MCI recently offering him some deal
> (something like up to $4000 in free calls I think -- I'm foggy on the
> exact details) for his office phone lines.  They said that they were
> given his name by someone named Francis Kissinger who he supposedly
> calls frequently.  He's never heard of this person.  He smelled a scam
> and told them where they could put their deal (well, he didn't really
> do that but it sounds good) ...

> [Moderator's Note: Four thousand dollars in free calls? Gosh, if they
> will put that in writing, even I will sign up with MCI.  :)    PAT]

I got one of these, or at least something very similar, the other day
too.  It's not as good a deal as it looks at first glance.  For one
thing, it's actually "up to" $4000.00.  The deal is actually that you
get two months worth of long distance, up to $2000.00 per month, free.
Guess what the catch is?  That's right, it's an average over several
months.  So, you have to spend around $2000.00 per month on the other
months as well to get the top end of the free time.  Oh, but there is
another catch.  The averages are figured on (if I remember this
correctly) the third month (to hook you) and the 18th month (to make
sure they've got you long enough to make it profitable).  So, when you
look at the whole picture, it ends up being less than a 6% discount.


Bruce Carter, CBI Product Development            [e-mail]
Simplot/Micron Instructional Technology Center   amccarte@idbsu (Bitnet)
Boise State University, Boise, ID  83725         [phone]@phone

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Costing Home Fiber Installation: Looking For Advice
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 17:53:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Peter Scott, NASA/JPL/
Caltech ([e-mail]) writes:

> let's say that I'm moving to a house one to five miles outside the
> nearest (small) town in Northern California, for the sake of immediate
> argument, not that there won't be many other issues to nail down.
> Whom should I contact for more information?

You should contact an INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER also called a
mid-level network operator or "regional network". There are about 50
of these; most are only active in a particular geographical area, and
many serve only "Research and Education".

Among the beter known providers of commercial connections are:

    Alternet (UUNET Technologies)
    PSI (Performance Systems International, I think)
    CERFnet

> [Moderator's Note: It won't come inexpensively, and unless your expected
> volume of news and mail is going to be really huge, you will probably
> wind up with a UUCP-style arrangement, calling on the phone as desired
> to poll, etc.  Private, dedicated circuits of any kind -- fiber optic
> or regular lead wires -- are seldom justified economically unless you
> can keep the line loaded, or in use virtually 24 hours per day. You
> will also need to pay whoever provisions your Internet connection, in
> addition to telco or whoever strings the circuit for you. ...  PAT]

For most mileage bands, the leased circuit is less expensive if you
need more than four to eight hours of connect time per day. UUCP
"batch mode" is okay for USENET, but to get to "the good stuff" you
need a real internet connection. Fortunately, these are becoming
affordable in the US now.

The biggest cost driver is carriage from your house to the network
provider's nearest router. If you are five males from a small town,
odds are that the network provider's point of presence is not within a
local call. (They tend to co-locate with either a large research park
or the LATA point-of-presence of a long-distance carrier.)

I am looking at this for my new location in Copenhagen, Denmark. For
that location, a metro call (measured service) is $0.07 per minute,
and for dial-in, the network operator charges another $0.07/minute.  A
leased line pays its monthly rental in 93 minutes per day. Unfortunately,
the one-time installation charge for the leased line and for the
network operator run to almost $5000 between them.  This is for a
two-wire circuit capable of handling the 9600/14400 bps modems that
are now the standard.

If you are fairly close to a POP (point of presence) the carriage may
be less than $100/month for a four-wire circuit that can run 56 Kbps.
The going rate for the Internet Service through that pipe is about
$1000/month. This is not totally out of reach for engineering consult-
ants working out of their home.

If you are within a local call of someone who has an internet
connection and is willing to share with you, you can get a couple of
IP addresses from their network number, and run a dial-up IP
connection over 14400 bps modems. With enough savvy, you can install
free software on a unix workstation on each end of the link. Or you
can buy a turnkey dial-up router to install at each end for $1995
each, which attaches to the ethernet at each end and dials up the link
when there's traffic.  This puts the cost well within the budget of
many "part-time work-at-home" engineers. And the prices are coming
down fast.

Going up the speed range, the price goes up fast. From 14400 bps to 56
kbps is not a big step: Each of them is worth "one phone connection".
The next faster is typically a T1 (1544 kbps) line, worth 24 phone
connections, and usually priced at about ten times the 56 kbps.  The
point at which they run a fiber is probably a T3 (43 million bits per
second) which is 28 T1's or 672 telephone connections' worth.  I
haven't priced it recently, but it isn't cheap.

Disclaimer: I am not an unbiased observer; I work in Rockwell's
NetHopper development team. The NetHopper is a dial-on-demand IP
router ... which happens to cost $1995 including one 14400 bps modem.


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer    Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l    Telephone: [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083        TeleFAX:   [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Chen)
Subject: With Phone on Hook, How is Caller-ID Transmitted?
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 15:08:17 GMT
Organization: Hughes Network Systems Inc.


My understanding is that between first ring and second ring, the CO
sends out the digits (or alpha) in 1200 baud signal to indicate the
caller id.  My question is that if the phone is not yet offhook, there
is no complete circuit loop, how can any signal be sent? (That's why
ringing is done in AC)???


Tom

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #413
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09235;
          21 Jun 93 19:36 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15499
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 21 Jun 1993 16:30:40 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16123
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 21 Jun 1993 16:30:00 -0500
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 16:30:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #412

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 21 Jun 93 16:30:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 412

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Caller-ID and Privacy (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Dead Cordless Phone Dials 911? (John Holman)
    What Switch is in Use in My Area? (Michael Rosen)
    International City Codes (Karl Braun)
    Want Network Modeling Software (Z. Zhao)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (Mark Evans)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (Douglas White)
    Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards (Steve Forrette)
    Re: NYNEX ISDN Hot Line (Ken Germann)
    Re: Dial-up IP Connectivity (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Fastest Dialup Modems at 19,200 Baud (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Need Modem Lockout Circuit (Brett Frankenberger)
    Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland (David Leibold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 08:54:37 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Caller-ID and Privacy


Lately I have been seeing quite a few postings that debate people's
"rights" such as privacy. To me these have a fundamental flaw in that
they assume "rights" that do not exist.

When someone walks up to my door, unless it is a sworn office of the
law I am under no compulsion to open the door. How I make that
decision is purely up to me. If I wish to invest in a peephole or
television camera, that is also up to me.

Caller-ID is much the same and concerns my decision whether to answer
the phone. A person coming up to my door has the right to wear a black
hood over their head. I have the right not to answer. Neither of us
has the right to force the other's decision.

A postmark on a letter tells much about where it came from and a
registered letter must be signed for. The only right we have is to
decide where to mail the letter from and whether to sign the receipt,
we cannot tell the post office to use a different postmark or to
deliver the letter without a receipt.

Caller-ID is a fact just as ANI is a fact. The information exists.
What seems to be occupying people is whether it *should* exist which
is not a choice.

Just realized that this opens an avenue for a new telco service --
Remote Caller-ID. What this means is that for a physician, he can have
a telephone at home that will report his office number as the
Caller-ID. The criteria would be simple: permission of the owner of
the second number. Might require a second line at home but billed to
the office.


TANSTAAFL,

Padgett

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 00:00:00 GMT
From: [e-mail] (John Holman)
Organization:  University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
Subject: Dead Cordless Dials 911?


I thought that I had a pretty good handle on cordless telephone
features until last Friday night.  As I was watching some late night
TV last Friday a police officer came to my door to enquire about the
house next door.  He said he was responding to a 911 call that
appeared to have come from the house next door but no one was home.  I
told him the people were on vacation.  He responded that he thought a
cordless telephone in which the batteries were dying had automatically
dialed 911!  I have never heard of this feature before.  Has anyone
else?  It would seem like a bad feature for the 911 dispatchers to
deal with to me.  When they return I will check the model of their
telephone.


[Moderator's Note: We've discussed this here before. I forget what the
group consensus was regards the technical problem here. Anyone?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: What Switch is in Use in My Area?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 16:05:53 GMT


I live in Baltimore (Pikesville, to be exact, for those who are
familiar with the area) and we have such services as call return, call
trace, etc.  The only difference that I can tell between my service
and a friend's in Fairfax, VA is our call waiting.  My call waiting is
still the same old style where the line is disconnected briefly and I
hear a loud beep on my end only (more like BOOP).  However, my
friend's call waiting in Fairfax, VA is simply a beep that does not
interrupt the line like mine does.  If you were on the phone with me
and I got call waiting you would hear the line disconnect briefly as
if I had hung up.  The other system I believe you might hear a brief
pause if the other person was speaking at the moment call waiting
signalled.

Also, does anyone know what system Washington, DC is using now?


Mike

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Karl Braun)
Subject: International City Codes
Organization: Novell Inc., San Jose, Califonia
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 15:36:27 GMT


I'm looking for any kind of standard for encoding city names.  We're
looking to do this on an International scale, but something that only
specifies US cities would be just as well.

We started out using standard airport codes, but that can get pretty
cryptic (YYZ, I think, for Toronto?).  I'm aware of the Postal Service
suggested abbreviations for city names and common street names, but am
looking for something that might limit the names to three to five
characters (would, of course, only encompass major cities).


Thanks,

kral   408/647-6112   Network Scapegoat in Training    NOVELL/DSG

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Z. Zhao)
Subject: Want Network Modeling Software
Date: 21 Jun 93 08:49:54
Organization: Computing Research Lab


Hello, Netters,

I am trying to find a software package for network modeling, which is
capable of simulating computer LAN, WAN as well as large communication
networks, and supplying data analysis tools. Do you have some informa-
tion about such software packages?


Regards,

ZiZi

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?
Organization: Aston University
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 09:30:28 GMT


Mark Brader ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 1-110-1010.  A perfectly reasonable phone number.

> When I read this, I immediately deduced that wherever the novel was
> supposed to be set, it wasn't the present-day USA.

It is actually set in something like 1960's USA.

No idea if it relates to any numbering plan in force then.  Unlikely.


Mark Evans                       [e-mail]
+(44) 21 429 9199  (Home)        [e-mail]
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)


[Moderator's Note: If anything, it would have been far less likely
in the USA in the 1960's. Bell would never have had prefixes like that
in those days.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Douglas White)
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?
Organization: NIST
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 16:21:47 GMT


And remember... if you don't use 555 in movies, etc. the calls from
the people who need to get a life may come back to haunt you!

Gary Trudeau put the White House switchboard number in one Doonesbury
strip, and if I remember right, by the middle of the day the strip
ran, the White House had arranged for the telcos to route calls to
that number back to G.T.'s publisher. :-)

Beware of powerful people with a sense of humor ...

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards
Date: 21 Jun 1993 06:44:25 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Norman Yarvin) writes:

> So, the reason stores would require a PIN is so that they get the full
> amount of money; in the process they hit you with about a month's
> worth of high interest charges.

> We wouldn't need any of this funny business if stores were allowed to
> charge more for credit card purchases.  It'd be easy for a computerized
> store to charge exactly 2% more, and thus exactly recoup its costs.
> But Congress in its all-seeing wisdom has passed a law against that
> practice.

I don't think there is any law against this -- it is the policy of the
credit card companies (if I'm wrong on this point, please correct
me!).  In addition to being a cardholder, I'm also a MasterCard/Visa
merchant, so I've had some experience in this area.  Many of the rules
that govern these transactions are part of the "merchant agreement,"
which is the contract between the merchant and their bank which spells
out a lot of these rules.  The reason that the MasterCard/Visa member
banks don't want the merchants to charge extra for credit transactions
is that they want to encourage as many credit card transactions as
possible.  They don't want the cardholder to think "Gee, do I really
want to pay 2% extra when I can get it cheaper by using cash?"  What
they want the cardholder to think is "Using my credit card doesn't
cost anything extra, and it is more convenient than cash."

Another restriction that is built into most (all?) merchant agreements
is that the merchant cannot set a minimum transaction amount for
credit card purchases.  Many smaller merchants routinely violate this
requirement (which they voluntarily agreed to when the signed their
merchant agreements).  Again, the MasterCard/Visa member banks want
the customer to not have any hassles when using their cards - they
should be as convenient as cash.

As Pat mentioned in an earlier message, it is not necessarily more
expensive for the grocery store to pay the discount rate for the
credit card transactions.  To start with, it is likely that they pay
closer to a 1% discount rate because of their volume and the special
deals that the banks have been making with grocery stores in
particular.  Second, it is not free to accept cash, believe it or not.
Cash needs to be counted, kept in a safe, guarded from employee theft,
taken to the bank by armored car, carries a robbery risk, etc.  Also,
rolled coin must be obtained from the bank in order to provide change,
and banks usually charge business customers for non-trivial amounts of
rolled coin.  The 1-2% discount rate is sounding cheaper all the time,
isn't it?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ken Germann)
Subject: Re: NYNEX ISDN Hot Line
Organization: Sky Point Communications, Inc.
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 06:38:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(H.A. Kippenhan Jr.) writes:

> A few weeks ago, someone posted a number for an ISDN hotline in the
> NYNEX service area.  A project on which I'm now working would make
> that number very useful; alas, I didn't save it.

> If somone would be kind enough to repost it, it would be greatly
> appreciated.

> Alternatively, if any of the readership has specific information about
> the availibility of ISDN Basic Rate service for: (212) 327-xxxx I
> would be interested in that as well.  By Basic Rate Service I mean 64
> Kbps and SS7 trunking from NYNEX to AT&T.

Digiboard supports the ISDN connections through the IMAC and PC/IMAC
product lines. There/our sales department can be reached at
612-943-9020 or e-mail to [e-mail].

The IMAC will do either 128k per second or 256k per second on an ISDN line.


Ken Germann              Sky Point Communications, Inc.
[e-mail]          Owner/Administrator.
[phone] Voice          A RIP based Unix OIS. (coming soon)
[phone] Data 2400/14.4  More Info: [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Dial-up IP Connectivity
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 06:46:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Peter.van.Oosterom@fel.
tno.nl (Peter van Oosterom) writes:

> I'm posting this message for a friend who doens't have news, so please
> react to his e-mail address: [e-mail] and not to this
> group.

Actually, this may be of general interest. I recently looked into
getting IP connectivity for a small office in Copenhagen Denmark, and
boy, is it expensive right now. ($10,000.- for a 9600 bps leased line
for one year.) As a result, I am now thinking very hard about how to
do what I need to do.

> We're a small organisation in the Netherlands that wants to set up
> Internet connectivity. We intend to have dial-up IP connectivity since
> this is probably the most attractive service for us.  However, we're
> entirely Mac based and I'm not familiar with any products on Macs to do
> things like:

> - setting up a news server and clients (with NNTP support)
> - setting up a SMTP mail hub, to be connected to our Quickmail server
> - providing 'on-demand' set-up of external IP connectivity.

> We have our Macs connected on an Ethernet and we're running Netware.
> Our potential service provider indicates that they want to 'see' only
> one IP-address for manageability reasons.

> Who can give me some pointers / solutions and possible products?
> Should we get a UNIX workstation or can we do without it?

For your Internet service provider, there are several different
elements that drive costs. One very large component is routing table
maintenance.  For a variety of reasons, it is MUCH simpler to deal
with ONE IP host at the end of the wire than with a whole network. A
single host on the subscriber wire can have an IP address from the
provider's network number; a customer owned network number must be
made known to the whole world. It so happens, that in the corporate
world, it is often desiable to make sure that only a single network
gateway is reachable from the outside world (makes information
security much easier) so this is a good match. Unfortunately, this is
the exact opposite of what would be ideal for you.

If you are limited to one IP address, then a Unix machine (an old
Sun-3 or an A/UX or a NeXT) is much the easiest to maintain. On the
local side of that, you can use either TELNET/TCP/IP over the LAN or
dial-up for off-site members. These people would have to log in to the
unix gateway before they could reach the outside world. I.e. the
user's machine is pretty much just a terminal to the network server
machine.

> - setting up a news server and clients (with NNTP support)
> - setting up a SMTP mail hub, to be connected to our Quickmail server
> - providing 'on-demand' set-up of external IP connectivity.

To run all of these tasks on the same machine requires a true
multiuser operating system. Most cheap examples of this will be UNIX
based.  You will need at least 500 MB of hard disk space to do these
things well.

If you run your mail service on UNIX, you would be MUCH happier to
toss Quickmail and run Eudora on the Macs. The quickmail SMTP gateway
has some quirks and lacks scripts to handle efficient maintenance of
the Quickmail equivalent of alias files.

I don't quite know why you are running Netware in a pure Mac environ-
ment. TOPS seems a lot more appropriate, and even the free CAP Apple-
talk File Server for Unix seems to me to be better integrated.


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer    Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l    Telephone: [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083        TeleFAX:   [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Fastest Dialup Modems at 19,200 Baud
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 07:09:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Alfredo Cotroneo) writes:

> Until a few months ago it was not possible to send/receive data over a
> dialup line at a speed of more than 14,400 bauds (uncompressed), and
> V32bis modems were the way to go. When data is binary (or ADPCM),
> V42bis (or worse MNP5) would not help in achieving a better transfer
> rate.

> But where are the modem/DSP companies going now? Is there a
> possibility to see even faster modems in the near future, do they
> exist already, or have they reached already the fastest achieavable
> speeds using all phone bandwdth?

It is generally believed that the fastest that can be achieved with
good analog local loops and 64kbps digital long distance circuits is
about 28800 bits per second. Several modem vendors have implemented
such modems using a variety of entensions to the same kind of signal
processing used in V.32bis (the current 14400 bps standard.)

A CCITT committee is trying to write a standard for 28800 bps modems.
When they finish arguing about whose patents to base the published
standard on, the new spec (nicknamed V.fast) will be published.

Both AT&T Paradyne and Motorola UDS have started shipped modems with
28800 capability. These are currently very expensive, but should drop
to about $500 within about 18 months.

After that, it will have to be ISDN. As for the suggestion that ISDN
may never come to rural Italia: Those rural lines might not be capable
of running over 9600 bps either.


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer    Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l    Telephone: [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083        TeleFAX:   [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brett Frankenberger)
Subject: Re: Need Modem Lockout Circuit
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 13:10:39 GMT


[e-mail] (Robert Berger) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (JEREMY
> GINGER) writes:

>> Connect two Zenner Diodes (11 V) back-to-back in series with the lower
>> priority line.  If you know the polarity of the wire you can get away
>> with one Zenner.

> I don't see how this can work. When you try to use the low priority
> device, won't the drop in line voltage then turn of the Zener? It
> seems to me that this circuit would oscillate between on-hook and
> off-hook.

> I believe you need some sort of latching device; the Radio Shack
> version uses an SCR.

> I have also seen a circuit that uses a four layer trigger diode (Diac)
> in series with each device. This gives priority to the first device to
> go off-hook.

No.  In fact, I an using such a device even as we speak.  View the
Zener diode as a constant 11V (Actually 11.7 Volt if you have one
backward and one forweard in series) drop.  Then, without the Zener,
you have 48V from the CO, approx 2K ohm in the loop, and, we'll say,
600 ohm in the phone.  The result is 48V / 2600 ohm = 18.5 ma current
in the loop, and 18.5 * .6 = 11.1V across the telephone.

With the Zener in the line, if you go off hook, you have (48 - 11.7) /
2600 equals 14.0 ma in the loop, and 14.0 * .6 = 8.4 V across the
telephone.

In practice, a 600 ohm resistor is not a perfect model for the phone,
but it's close enough to demonstrate that the Zerner diode will not
completely cut-out whatever is on the far end of it.  It will, of
course, dissipate some power, and the signal getting to the 'low
priority' phone will not be as loud and clear, but it will be close.

Of course, when the high-priority line goes off hook, the line voltage
ahead of the Zener drops below 11.7, so nothing gets through the
Zener.  But when the high-priority device is not in the circuit
(on-hook), the low-pri device does just fine.  It just sees a bit
lower voltage when it goes off hook.  From its point of view, the loop
now just has a higher impedance than it did before.


(formerly [e-mail])
Brett Frankenberger    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic & Poland
From: woody <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 09:22:05 -0400


The Moderator wonders what is happening to NPA 610 now that it will be
used to split the Philadelphia 215 area code. Some hints from various
documents suggest that Canadian telcos will want to keep an NPA for
datalink/ISDN purposes (a successor to TWX services). Now, an inquiry
at Bellcore earlier this year resulted in the finding that NPA 600 was
no longer available.  This sounds circumstantial, but it appears that
610 was moved (or is being moved) to 600.

Of course, this might still mess up the oversease chat line folks when
they discover that 610 will be an actual area code soon.


David Leibold    [e-mail]   [e-mail]
[e-mail] (new link; use at own risk)

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #412
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21664;
          22 Jun 93 3:53 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20802
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 22 Jun 1993 01:11:41 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24908
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 22 Jun 1993 01:11:08 -0500
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 01:11:08 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #414

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Jun 93 01:11:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 414

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911? (James P Gonzales)
    Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Caller-ID and Privacy (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Caller-ID and Privacy ([e-mail])
    Re: Caller-ID Mistakes (Jerry Stubbs)
    Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID ([e-mail])
    Re: Cross-Border Local Calling (Paul S. Sawyer)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (John Stafford)
    Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey (Charles Mattair)
    Re: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial (Steven King)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Curtis Bohl)
    Re: Bell Operating Company Predecessors (R. Kevin Oberman)
    Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG) (R. Kevin Oberman)
    Re: Germany: Collect Calls Are Back!! ([e-mail])
    Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards (Mike King)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones, One Number (John Schmidt)
    Re: Telecom Trip Report: Deaver, WY (Carl Moore)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (James P Gonzales)
Subject: Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911?
Date: 21 Jun 93 23:25:08 GMT
Organization: Educational Computing Network


[e-mail] (John Holman) writes:

[stuff deleted]

> told him the people were on vacation.  He responded that he thought a
> cordless telephone in which the batteries were dying had automatically
> dialed 911!  I have never heard of this feature before.  Has anyone

[stuff deleted]

> [Moderator's Note: We've discussed this here before. I forget what the
> group consensus was regards the technical problem here. Anyone?   PAT]

I wasn't around to follow that thread, but the same thing has happened
to me as well; it seems that the phone's battery goes weak, and it
starts to dial random memory set phone numbers. I assume that your
neighbor had 911 as one of the presets and the same thing happened to
them. Of course, maybe my experience was of an entirely different
nature, but that is what I have concluded about my own phone. In
addition, when the battery runs out the phone likes to change my
presets, for instance a memory with ph number 123-4567 might change to
122-4567, where one digit was changed. Kinda annoying, so keep those
phones charged.


James P Gonzales   [[e-mail]]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911?
Date: 21 Jun 1993 23:48:15 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Holman) writes:

> As I was watching some late night TV last Friday a police officer
> came to my door to enquire about the house next door.  He said he was
> responding to a 911 call that appeared to have come from the house
> next door but no one was home.  I told him the people were on
> vacation.  He responded that he thought a cordless telephone in which
> the batteries were dying had automatically dialed 911!

I remember seeing a news story about this phenomenon on one of the
local news stations in the SF Bay Area -- it must have been 1986 or
so.  Of course, the technical details in the story were non-existant.
They just stated that some models will call 911 when the battery dies.
Perhaps it's that people have 911 programmed into one of the speed
dial numbers, and the phone has the bad habit of calling a speed dial
number as it dies.  Who knows?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Privacy
Date: 21 Jun 1993 23:45:16 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

> Just realized that this opens an avenue for a new telco service --
> Remote Caller-ID. What this means is that for a physician, he can have
> a telephone at home that will report his office number as the
> Caller-ID. The criteria would be simple: permission of the owner of
> the second number. Might require a second line at home but billed to
> the office.

It was reported in the Digest a couple of months ago that just this
service was being offered in Canada (was it by Bell Canada in
Ontario?).  So, the software to do this is already in the switches (at
least for the DMS-100).


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There is also the 900 service where the guy patches
your call out to wherever you want to call with no ID given. He is an
attorney in California, but I forget the 900 number you call to use
his service (if you think it is worthwhile). He claims he is not res-
ponsible for mischievious or illegal uses made of his line (he gets a
lot of people who like to play games on the phone with victims they
call), but he has been sued a couple times and always has to pay off.
I guess he figures he still comes out ahead, with 900 rates being as
outlandish as they are most of the time.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Privacy
Organization: TRW Inc., Redondo Beach, CA
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 93 01:03:11 GMT


I've seen this analogy used twice as an argument for one's inalienable
right to obtain a caller's number.  When someone walks up to your
door, you do not get information which allows you to visit their home.

Inverting the above analogy, caller ID should deliver exactly that:
some form of unique ID which enables one to make an authentication/
authorization decision.  It should *not* return information allowing
"reverse access".


Greg

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jerry Stubbs)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Mistakes
Organization: University of Kansas Computer Science Dept
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 17:45:21 GMT


My caller-ID box stores up to 30 numbers, and some of them seem close
to people I would expect to call. I have also returned supposed calls
that the callers denied any knowledge of. One was from Radio Shack
about an item, and he left a recording, but no number.  The number on
the ID box didn't get me back to Radio Shack.  I therefore suspect the
error check is not very accurate. I think it is supposed to have
parity, but I've never seen the 'error' indicator flashing yet.


[Moderator's Note: Caller-ID boxes can have errors due to transmission
problems, but it is far more likely the people lie. They don't like
to admit they got a wrong number then discourteously hung up without
apologizing, for example. But if you get the same number two or three
times on the display and call back, only to have them insist they did
not call you and 'there must be a mistake', you can draw your own
conclusions.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 17:05:17 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID
Organization: AT&T


> Can someone tell me, when you forward your calls in a Caller ID
> equipped area, does the called party get the original caller number
> or the number doing the forwarding?

I tried this last year and the results were inconsistent.  I have call
forwarding at home (708)-554-xxxx and Caller ID at work (708)-979-xxxx.
My answering machine at home broke, so I forwarded my calls to my work
number. Most forwarded calls were IDed as my home phone number.  But
calls from the same exchange (Other 554-xxxx lines), were IDed with
the real originators number.  I'm not sure which behavior is
"correct".

(Side note: ANI provided to an 800 number owner should provide the
number of the forwarding phone, since the forwarding phone would be
billed for the call if it were chargeable and ANI is normally used to
forward the billing number.)

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul S. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: Cross-Border Local Calling
Date: 21 Jun 1993 18:14:27 GMT
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Garrett Wollman) writes:

> According to my phone book, Derby Line is 802 873; unfortunately, I
> don't have the phone book for that part of the state handy so I can't
> check the dialing instructions for anything interesting.

I did have it handy, and it lists the exchange 876 (Rock Island, PQ,
AC 819) as local to the 873 exchange.  Maybe served by the same CO?


Paul S. Sawyer    - University of New Hampshire CIS -  [e-mail]
Telecommunications and Network Services                VOX: [phone]
50 College Road                                        FAX: [phone]
Durham, New Hampshire  03824-3523

------------------------------

From: News Admin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 18:44:43 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard


Mark Brader ([e-mail]) wrote:

> As has been said, the point of 555-numbers is that they look like
> ordinary numbers to the naive viewer, but really aren't.  Which
> reminds me of a passage from Michael Chrichton's novel "The Andromeda
> Strain" which, as far as I can reconstruct it from memory, is along
> the following lines.  A character has just received the coded phone
> message that he never expected to really happen, saying that an
> emergency had occurred and the secret Project Wildcan is to be
> activated ...

Project Wildfire.

The extension was 222 (aka 1-101-1110).


John "why do I remember these things" Stafford

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 11:40:37 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff
Wasilko) writes:

> At my former job, I was the phone admin. When SNET was ready to start
> the service, I got a letter explaining the new auto-connect option
> (and it's implications for call accounting and least-cost-routing/
> special trunks).

> SNET offered to block the service on all of our lines for no charge,
> initially. After the start-up period, they would charge $21/per line
> to remove the service ...

> [Moderator's Note: But can you really imagine anyone paying $21 per
> line at some future point to have such a worthless feature re-enabled
> on their line just so they could pay everytime they used it?  I am
> sure for most people, once gone, that 'feature' stays gone.

This thread peeked my interest enough to call SWB about blocking.  The
service rep initially claimed there was no way to block 411
completion.  After some cajoling and after I pointed out it was
blocked from SWB and COCOT payphones and hotels, among other places,
she agreed to check into it.

An hour later, she calls back.  Turns out SWB will block FOR FREE -- no
installation charge, no monthly fee, no nothing.  You still get the
message but the call will not complete unless you select some way to
pay for it.  What this means (other than it won't bill to the
originating number), I won't know until Wednesday when the block goes
in (takes three working days to put it in :-( ).

I tried to get a service/order code but she claimed there wasn't one
other than a long sentence which translated to DA call completion
blocking.  This didn't appear to be an introductory/limited time
feature, just something SWB doesn't advertise because it would cost
them revenue.

Your mileage may vary.


Charles Mattair     (until 16 July - work)    [e-mail]
<standard.disclaimer>

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 20:49:14 GMT


[e-mail] publicly declared:

> The point of the You Will commercials is to show people the technolog-
> ical marvels that people have been talking about for years, and
> associate them with AT&T as a technology company, not just a Long
> Distance company.

Last week I saw a cute "You Will" ad.  This was a joint ad by AT&T and
either Paramount or the local TV station which shows Star Trek: Deep
Space Nine.  The ad wasn't on TV; I saw it as a small stand-up poster
on the concession stand at the movie theatre.

Anyway, it had a picture of the Deep Space Nine space station.  Text
went something like,

       Have you ever explored the
       outer reaches of the galaxy?

                You will.

Now *THAT'S* advanced technology!  :-)


Steven King, Motorola Cellular  ([e-mail])

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Missouri 4-H Youth Development Programs)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 19:40:21 CDT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu writes:

> Also, another small exchange next to us had a unique system, where the
> switch rang all the phones on the party line, but with a different
> combination of rings (1 short-2 long, etc.).  I learned about this
> from a high school teacher who was awakened many times in the middle
> of the night.

> [Moderator's Note: You are talking about a *long* time ago!   PAT]

I know this CO only went digital within the past five years.  On the
subject of party lines, it was interesting by dialing the right
combination of codes, you could get one or two different party's
phones ringing at the same time, and neither of them call each other.

Also, for long distance calls, you dialed an extra digit following the
"1", to indicate what party you were on the line (i.e. bill your calls
to someone else).  Never did it myself since it would be easy to track
down to three or four people on your party line.


Curtis Bohl    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bell Operating Company Predecessors
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 07:20:03 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (A
Alan Toscano) writes:

> As I recall, Illinois Bell Telephone began its life as The Chicago
> Telephone Company, and kept that name for a time as part of the early
> Bell Telephone System. I wonder if any Digest readers in the US might
> know the names of the predecessors of other BOCs.

Mountain Bell (now USWest) was originally Mountain States Telephone.
Guess that by the time telephones made it to the Rockies they had
decided that telegraphs were not too important any more. (Or maybe they
dropped the word before my time.)


R. Kevin Oberman    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: [e-mail]    [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 07:34:24 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andy
Sherman) writes:

> On 6 Jun 93 22:05:40 GMT, [e-mail] (Rob
> Levandowski) said:

> Since Toby Nixon has left Hayes and probably won't set the record
> straight on this one, I'll step up to the plate.  It is a popular
> misconception that what Hayes has patented is the AT command set.
> This is not true.  What Hayes patented was their technique for using a
> single data stream for both the data and control channel for modems.
> This technique involves the use of coded data in the data stream to
> switch the modems into command mode.  (The example coded data stream
> is, of course, silence for the guard time, followed 3 '+' signs in
> rapid succession).  I don't think one can evade their patent by
> choosing a different coded data stream, as the patent is on the
> mode-switching method, not the particular triggers used in its most
> popular embodiment.

I have a copy of the patent somewhere, but I do remember that the
specific claim of patentability is the use of a time delimited
"escape" sequence to transition from data to command mode.  That means
the <guard time><pattern><guard time> is what is patented. Also note
that the guard time is on both sides of the pattern. There may have
been other claims of patentability, but this was the main one and did
not have anything to do with AT commands.

The patent does not state what the "guard time" will be, but that it
should be a minimum time with no maximum and that it be significantly
longer than any gap in a data stream. Nor does the patent specify that
the pattern should be the same character repeated three times.

I still find it amazing that this patent was upheld, but I'm not a
lawyer and courts often amaze me.


R. Kevin Oberman    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: [e-mail]    [phone]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 17:30:27 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Germany: Collect Calls Are Back!!
Organization: AT&T


>> What are typical operator charges in the US or elsewhere?

> For calls within the U.S., they are usually about 22c/minute (USD
> 0.22) for calls within a state, and up to 25c/minute for a call from
> Washington, DC to Los Angeles, about 2500 miles.  At night, the rate
> is about 10c per call.  This is AT&T's rate; Sprint or MCI will
> usually beat it by 1c per minute or so.

You left out the surcharge for Operator Services.  Any time you place
an operator assisted call and talk to a live operator (not automatic
credit card) the first three minutes of your call are billed at a
higher rate that varies with the type of call, I think the first three
minutes of a collect call run about $2.50 - $2.75 (I dont have a rate
scale to check), additional minutes are billed at the same rate as
direct dial.

(This is also based on AT&Ts rate scale, but so are everybody else's
rates ;-)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 17:49:31 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards


In TELECOM Digest V13 #408, [e-mail] (Norman Yarvin)
writes:

> A cash transaction usually means interest is calculated from the day
> you withdraw the money.  Check your credit card policy; this is the
> case with mine, and I'd be surprised if anybody did it differently.

Both my AT&T Universal Card (VISA) and my Discover Card charge a
transaction fee, but if the amount advanced is paid in full during the
next billing cycle AND there is no previous unpaid balance, then no
interest is charged.  Of course, the transaction fee can get hefty,
depending on the amount advanced.


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Schmidt)
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones, One Number
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 22:03:20 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site


According to a recent issue of {Mobile Office} magazine, the FCC has
stated that this practice (cloning ESN's) violates FCC regulations.
Moblie Office says that they will no longer accept advertisements for
this service.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 18:18:01 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom Trip Report: Deaver, WY


That is Deaver/Frannie, not Deaver/Franney (307-664 Frannie, and also
406-764 North Frannie, MT).

Deaver zip code 82421, post office in Big Horn County. Frannie zip code
82423, post office in Polk County.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #414
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22084;
          22 Jun 93 4:11 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02199
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 22 Jun 1993 02:01:39 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09539
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 22 Jun 1993 02:01:03 -0500
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 02:01:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #415

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Jun 93 02:01:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 415

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T Loyalty Program? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Traffic Chokes for High Volume Subscribers ([e-mail])
    Re: Bell Operating Company Predecessors (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Cordless Headset (Lynne Gregg)
    Telephone Areacode/Prefix to City Database [FOUND] (Steve Davidson)
    Cellular Equal Access Ballot (Jeff Garber)
    Needed: Old Audiovox Handset (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Interactive Voice Response Systems (Roy M. Silvernail)
    Telecom Faculty Position Open (Greg Brewster)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Andy Rabagliati)
    CDPD Articles Wanted (Hindra Irawan)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: AT&T Loyalty Program?
Date: 22 Jun 1993 01:37:04 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael Rosen) writes:

> Is there somewhere in particular, besides AT&T's business number, that
> I should call to sign up for this?  I tried calling 800-222-0300 the
> night I read the post here on TELECOM Digest.  At first the operator
> seemed to comprehend what I was talking about but then she started
> going off about discounts of 25% to the one area code I dial the most.
> This did not sound like the "loyalty program" described in the post to
> TD.

I called the 800-222-0300 number and asked about the Loyalty Program,
and the rep knew exactly what I was talking about.  I already have the
Simple Savings program that you describe above (25% off calls to one
predesignated area code, and 15% off the rest), and the Loyalty
Program is in addition to this or any other calling plan.  They will
compute the average of my next six months' AT&T bills, and send me AT&T
gift certificates for that amount.  Among other things, I can then
send these certificates in with my local phone bill as payment for my
local and/or long distance charges.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 93 01:39:24 EDT
Subject: Re: Traffic Chokes for High Volume Subscribers


Bill Garfield ([e-mail]) wrote:


>> According to a Bell supervisor, their tariffs do not permit them to
>> place high traffic volume customers such as {Ticketron} in a "Choke"
>> exchange. Traffic chokes are only tariffed for use on radio station
>> contest lines.

> This does not seem to be the case in Boston. A quick search of phone
> book reveals that the (617) 931 exchange looks like a choke exchange.
> The following are the directory entries that list under 617 931 xxxx.

> Interestingly enough, Ticketmaster does list here along with some
> other "non radio stations". Greater Media is one of the local cable
> providers. I'm almost tempted to call "Soso entertainment" to see if
> their entertainment is better than their name would suggest!!

Here in RI, most all the radio stations that matter get assigned to
(401) 224-xxxx, for example:

WPRO-FM 224-1234
WPRO-AM 224-1776
WWKX-FM 224-1063
WHJY-FM 224-1994
WSNE-FM 224-1933

etc, but some radio stations such as WBRU and WALE are on regular
exchanges with WBRU at 272-9555 and WALE at 621-WALE. Weird.

> Ticketmaster-Charge-By-Phone

Here in RI, Ticketron/Ticketmaster is through an 800 number.

> Wcdj Fm 96.9-Listener Line
> Wmjx 106.7 Fm-Request Line

I was really upset when they changed the format at WCDJ from
Contemporaty Jazz to that junk they play on WMJX. :(


Tony

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Bell Operating Company Predecessors
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 04:52:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (A
Alan Toscano) writes:

> I wonder if any Digest readers in the US might know the names of the
> predecessors of other BOCs.

Lessee ... from memory so I might be wrong, New Jersey Bell used to be
the Delaware and Atlantic Telephone company, long long ago.  (Bell
Atlantic alludes to this, though I thought "Chesapeake and Atlantic"
would have been a better merged name, but it leaves out PennsyBell.)

The first directory ever published (1879 or so) was from the District
Telephone Co. of New Haven, no doubt predecessor of Southern New
England Telephone (never quite a Bell but close).

Of course the "indepenents" had some neat names too, but that might be
an eternal topic.  The old Red Jacket Telephone Company of Shortsville, NY?


Fred R. Goldstein  k1io   Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cordless Headset
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 13:10:00 PDT


Jack Adams asked about cordless headsets --

 Suggestion: try Hello Direct.  They have an '800' number for U.S.
access.  Check 800-555-1212 for the correct number.


Lynne Gregg


[Moderator's Note: Actually, their number is 800-HI-HELLO.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Davidson)
Subject: Telephone Areacode/Prefix to City Batabase [FOUND]
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1993 18:34:26 GMT


A database containing a mapping of telephone prefixes (area code and
exchange) to city and other information can be purchased from:

PC Consultant
713-826-2629 (voice mail only)
[e-mail]

The DOS program called 'NPA' costs $25 (I think).  The flat ASCII
database costs $200.  The database is produced via an export feature
of the basic software.  (Its the export feature that costs an
additional $200).  "Export" produces over 50,000 records in the
following format:


State                              NXX (prefix)
| NPA (area code)                  |  Latitude
| |  City                          |  |    Longitude
| |  |                             |  |    |     Primary Zip (best guess)
| |  |                             |  |    |     |    County
        Estimated County Population
| |  |                             |  |    |     |    |
        |
CA310Pacific Palisades             45434.04118.5290272Los Angeles
        8295000
CA310Pacific Palisades             45934.04118.5290402Los Angeles
        8295000
CA310Pacific Palisades             57334.04118.5290272Los Angeles
        8295000
CA415Pacifica                      35537.61122.4894044San Mateo
         613000
CA415Pacifica                      35937.61122.4894044San Mateo
         613000
CA415Pacifica                      73837.61122.4894044San Mateo
         613000
CA415Pacifica                      99337.61122.4894044San Mateo
         613000
CA619Pacific Beach                 27032.80117.2192117San Diego
        2201000
CA619Pacific Beach                 27232.80117.2192117San Diego
        2201000
CA619Pacific Beach                 27332.80117.2192117San Diego
        2201000
CA619Pacific Beach                 27432.80117.2192117San Diego
        2201000

[...]

              --------======= * =======--------

                       Steven Davidson
                       [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 93 05:08 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Equal Access Ballot


Today I received my Equal Access Ballot from L.A. Cellular. It came
with a Question and Answer pamphlet, and there are a couple of things
I found interesting.

Just like with the LECs, if you do not choose a carrier, one is chosen
for you at "random" on a percentage basis. That is if 30% of the
subscribers choose carrier A, then 30% of the lines where no carrier
was chosen will be assigned to carrier A. As someone pointed out to
me, this assignment may be arbitrary, but it is not random as the
chance of assignment to any carrier is not equal to that of the
others. I always thought that this was an unfair (to the carriers) way
of handling this. After all, why should more of the lines of those who
"don't care" be assigned to the carrier who got more of the lines of
those that sent in the ballot? I think it should be truly random.

The pamphlet also says, "To avoid any unintentional bias, we are
unable to disclose the name of our current carrier(s)." That is all
fine and good, until one looks at the ballot itself. I have never had
an occasion to place an interlata call on my cellular phone, but I
assumed the carrier was AT&T. Just to see how I get billed, I made an
interlata call this evening (I tried 415 and 408 POPCORN, because I
read here that that is the number for time in Northern CA, but my call
could not be completed as dialed. I began to think that I had NO long
distance carrier on my cell phone, but I finally decided to call
415-555-1212 and it went through).

Now even though L.A. Cellular is not allowed to say who the carrier is
(I think this is dumb anyway), apparently the company itself is free
to inform you about it. The ballot has each carrier's name and slogan
AS PROVIDED BY THE CARRIER (evidently) along with the IXC code and an
oval to bubble in () if that carrier is your choice. Here's what it
says (condensed):


IXC CODE      COMPANY NAME
--------      ------------
222 ()        MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORP. 1-800-950-5555
000 ()        TOLL RESTRICT $.80 PER MONTH CHARGE
554 ()        CELLTOLL CORP. THE CELLULAR LONG DISTANCE COMPANY
              1-800-231-9622
314 ()        ** CHECK HERE TO KEEP YOUR CURRENT SERVICE
              CELLULAR LONG DISTANCE 1-800-253-3353
333 ()        SPRINT LONG DISTANCE SERVICE. GET THE MOST (SM)
              WITH SPRINT! 1-800-PIN-DROP
288 ()        AT&T CELLULAR LONG DISTANCE SERVICE. THE RIGHT CHOICE
              1-800-892-3850 EXT. 5331
444 ()        ALLNET COMMUNICATION SERVICES, INC.
              ALLNET 'DIAL 1' SERVICE 1-800-783-2020

Well, so much for not telling us who the current carrier is! I called
carrier 314 and verified that their name really is "Cellular Long
Distance".


Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>

------------------------------

Date: 21-JUN-1993 14:19:54
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Needed: Old Audiovox Handset


After five faithful years of service, my Audiovox CMT-400 handset
stopped working.

It seems that a small chip (with only two leads) with the number 3580
(and then it says underneath "TG" and "A") fell off, and when I tried
to solder it back on, the heat must have ruined it, although I can't
say for sure.

The handset receives calls just fine, but it no longer displays any
info on the LCD screen, nor can I dial anything.

I called Audiovox in Happauge, LI, NY, and they said they no longer
have parts or deal with the CMT-400 series. Most other cellular parts
stores which I have called say the same thing, and some never even
carried the 400 series.

So ... I'd like to get the phone working again, and if anyone has a
CMT-400 series phone which they are not using, I'd like to buy it off
of them, or actually, just the handset. The handset model (part)
number is "CH-75", and any CMT-400 series handset should work fine.

Alternately, if anyone knows where I can get the 3580 chip, that would
be great too. I've looked in a number of chip guides, and they all
have no listing for the 3580 chip. (It goes 3579 and then right on to
3581, skipping 3580 in all cases.)

Any help would be greatly appreciated!


Thanks,

Doug    [e-mail]  //  [e-mail]

------------------------------

Subject: Interactive Voice Response Systems
From: [e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 13:25:54 CDT
Organization: The Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


Personally, I'm not a big fan of Voice Mail Jail, but I've been asked
to recommend an Interactive Voice Response system.  The application
will tie into a database lookup (much like a bank might give you
access to your account data) and needs similar accuracy performance.

E-mail appreciated, and I'll summarize the results.  Thanks in
advance!


[e-mail] -- Roy M. Silvernail

------------------------------

From: Greg Brewster <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom Faculty Position Open
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 15:48:36 CDT


DEPAUL UNIVERSITY of CHICAGO, ILLINOIS has a full time position open
starting in September, 1993 for a faculty member in the Computer
Science department specializing in telecommunications.

This faculty member will be teaching courses in the DePaul Masters in
Telecommunications Systems degree program including topics in
management and planning of telecommunications systems, analog and
digital switching, signaling and transmission systems, wide-area
carrier voice and data services, and other voice and data
communications topics.  This individual will also be providing
support, expertise and teaching to the Telecommunications Program in
the Institute for Professional Development, a non-degree professional
education program at DePaul University.

Qualified applicants will have either a Ph.D. degree in a related
field and some professional experience or a Masters degree in a
technical field and extensive professional experience in the
telecommunications area.  Salary is negotiable.  Benefits include TIAA
and standard health insurance.  U.S. citizenship is not required.

Applicants should send a description of their qualifications and
professional history to [e-mail] or to the address
below.

DePaul University is an equal opportunity employer.

        Gregory Brewster
        Institute for Telecommunications Research and Education
        DePaul University
        243 S. Wabash, Room 450
        Chicago, IL  60604

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Organization: W.Z.I.
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 00:23:23 -0600
From: Andy Rabagliati <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> She asked me if I would be using "touch tone technology". I was afraid
> to tell her that I have a T3000 modem using PPP to connect to the
> Internet!

I lived in rural Pennsylvania, and phone service was provided courtesy
of Commonwealth Telephone. CT charged extra for Tone Dial, and so, on
principle, I declined. Can you say ATDP .. ?

I had two lines, voice and modem.

A few months later they called, and asked "If I had a telephone with
buttons, or a round dial?".  So I told them what I thought of the $
extra for tone, and they left me alone.


Cheers,

Andy

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Hindra Irawan)
Subject: CDPD Articles Wanted
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 06:39:39 GMT


Can anybody direct me to online articles/documents on Cellular Data
Packet?  I need this information for a graduate level term paper.

Thanks in advance!

PS: Please reply by email ...


Hindra Irawan    [e-mail]    [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #415
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10298;
          22 Jun 93 22:09 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27627
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 22 Jun 1993 19:49:52 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16017
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 22 Jun 1993 19:49:18 -0500
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 19:49:18 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #416

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Jun 93 19:49:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 416

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    COMPCO and SUNBELT Telemanagement Software (Paul S. Sawyer)
    DID Trunks and Circular Reasoning (Seth B. Rothenberg)
    CompuServe Connection Failures (Tony Panero)
    AT&T and its Many Calling Plans (Michael Rosen)
    Step-by-Step Offices (William Hammond)
    I Guess There Really /is/ No Difference (Garrett Wollman)
    Interesting Uses To Justify Dialup Internet Connection (David McKellar)
    Caller ID and Non-Phone Number Display (Darrell Broughton)
    Re: What Switch is in Use in My Area? (Steven L. Spak)
    Re: What Switch is in Use in My Area? ([e-mail])
    Alpha Pager Interface (James Ian McGowan)
    Fast 19,200 Baud Modems (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    Re: AT&T Loyalty Program? (Monty Solomon)
    Re: AT&T Loyalty Program? (Steve Moulton)
    Re: AT&T Loyalty Program? (Steve Wegert)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Steven King)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Gary Segal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Paul S. Sawyer <[e-mail]>
Subject: COMPCO and SUNBELT Telemanagement Software
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 10:51:20 -0400 (EDT)
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services


I would appreciate any direct experience that anyone out there has
with using the current Sunbelt TMS or Compco MySoft products for
telecommunications billing and management.  Please E-mail, as this
would be of less than general interest.

Thank you.

Paul S. Sawyer    - University of New Hampshire CIS -  [e-mail]
Telecommunications and Network Services                VOX: [phone]
50 College Road                                        FAX: [phone]
Durham, New Hampshire  03824-3523

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
Subject: DID Trunks and Circular Reasoning
Date: 22 Jun 93 15:49:39 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


I have been investigating the possibility of starting a voicemail
service.  I got information on voicemail hardware and on add-on
hardware to support DID service.  I called Bell of PA to ask whether I
can start out with two-way trunks and then have the same numbers moved
to DID trunks when business picks up?

The Bell of PA rep told me that they can't answer that question.  They
said that a regular phone number is not necessarily usable as a DID
number, and they could not tell me whether I would get numbers that
could be used as DID numbers, and they could not reserve a block of
numbers for me.

I told the rep that I know that small businesses go from keyswitch to
PBX systems all the time, and they don't change their phone numbers.
They basically refused to tell me anything until I place an order.  I
did not bother asking if that's cash-up-front.  They said if you want
business planning advice, hire a telephone consultant.

Can anyone suggest a better approach?  (One suggestion I got was to go
for broke, and try to get the start-up capital to buy the hardware and
phone service, then advertise and try to get customers.  I'd prefer to
avoid this hassle.  That's no longer a 'small business' in my book.)

It crossed my mind to get extreme and rent a room in a neighborhood
that is not served by Bell of PA, but by GTE or some other service :-)


Thanks,

Seth

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tony Panero)
Subject: CompuServe connection failures
Date: 22 Jun 1993 12:57:42 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


I have been exchanging notes with CompuServe's customer representa-
tives concerning my inability to get into CompuServe on weekends;
since they have been spectacularly unhelpful, I wonder if the problem
is on their end, known to them, and something they'd rather not admit.
It may be that "unhelpful" is a competence problem (mine?  theirs?)
rather than an evasion problem.

The Problem:

When I attempt to login in the evenings Monday - Friday, I nearly
always succeed.  When I attempt to login late at night or anytime on
the weekend, I nearly always fail.  The problem occurs after the modem
connection is made; the character sent from the terminal end that
should elicit a "hostname" prompt is ignored; the network end times
out and hangs up after about 15 seconds as if it were not receiving
the character I send.  Occasional busy signals from the network aren't
a problem; the terminal emulators I use retry until they succeed.

What I've Done:

I have determined that line noise is not likely -- downloads of 1
megabyte files at 2400 bpi occur at the rate one would calculate, so
excessive retries are apparently not occurring.  I have used two
different terminal emulators plus the CompuServe GUI terminal emulator
(Mac CIM) and have used three different access numbers in three area
codes (415, 510, and 408) from two different computers, modems, and
locations, with similar results.

For the past two weeks I have made a point of not tinkering with the
modem settings so that I can be sure that the only variable is time of
week.  The past six weekends have been nearly a total failure.  On the
Monday of Memorial Day, however, I connected with no problem.

Speculation:

I assume that the local modems connect to a local front end computer
from which CompuServe access is provided.  One guess is that
CompuServe is selling excess network capacity during off hours and
their full price customers are getting bumped.

Advice and Comments Requested:

Anyone have any information or any ideas on what could cause this
problem?  Can you suggest tests I could perform to isolate the
problem?  Am I alone with this problem? I'd rather not drop the
service only to find out this is my fault.

I asked CompuServe Customer service about the possibility of setting
up a loopback test, but they did not respond.

I'll post a summary of the responses and let you know if I learn the
cause.

[Personal replies to [e-mail]; the from address in
this note sometimes fails.]


Tony Panero

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: AT&T and its Many Calling Plans
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 93 21:49:58 GMT


I wish deciding between a call savings plan wouldn't be so
difficult ...

At first, the Any Hour Savings Plan sounded like a good one.  Then a
friend informed me that there was an evening savings plan where you
pay something like $7.50 for the first hour of calls after 5pm and
then calls afterwards are discounted.

I asked about this and was told by the AT&T operator that the Simple
Savings Plan would be best for us.  This one would give us a 25%
savings to one specific area code and 15% to all others granted total
LD calls are above $30.  He said our average savings over four months
under AHS was $18.90 but he calculates would be $23.29 under SSP.

Do any other long distance companies possibly offer better savings
which would make it worth a switch?  Also, do any of them offer
anything like AT&T's Call Manager -- allowing a subtotalling of the
bill by user-specified codes (for easier splitting up of bills)?


Thanks,

Mike

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 93 18:14:50 EDT
From: William Hammond <[e-mail]>
Subject: Step-by-Step Offices


Are there anymore step-by-step offices in the US?  My mother said that
the last SxS switch in Maine was retired not too long ago.  How sad.


Thanks!

Bill Hammond KA1SSR          Voice: [phone] Ext. 2216
Analog Devices Semiconductor Voice mail: [phone]
804 Woburn Street            FAX: [phone]
Wilmington, MA 01887         Internet: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Why do you consider it sad? If you were served by
one for any length of time you'd not feel that way! I had a number out
of the Chicago-Wabash CO back in the 1970's when it was SxS. They did
not call that office 'the Wabash Cannonball' for nothing ... the setup
of calls was very noisy; the connections were nasty. We didn't know
any better ... then in 1975 they cut Wabash over to ESS, call-waiting,
the whole bit. I would not go back to those switches for anything.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: I Guess There Really /is/ No Difference ...
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 18:38:22 GMT


Recently I was considering how much time I spend on the phone talking
to my parents, and wondering if I could save some money by intelligent
choice of provider.  So, I called the LD operators for the Big Three
and tried to find out what I was paying now ...

When I called AT&T (my current PIC), an operator answered after the
first ring and was able (but don't seem particularly happy about it)
to tell me that for calls from 802 864 (Burlington, VT) to 702 829
(Reno, NV), I paid 0.25/0.15/0.13 cents per minute, with no
first-minute differential, for each of the time periods.

I then called MCI (10222-0).  The operator answered after one ring,
but then was unable to provide me with rate information, and
transferred me to a "customer service representative" (answered on the
third ring) who told me that MCI's rates were 0.25/0.15/0.13, except
that the first minute charge during peak rates was only 0.24.

Finally, I called Sprint (10333-0).  The operator answered after one
ring, and seemed genuinely pleased to provide rate information to me.
As it turned out, Sprint's rates are exactly the same as AT&T's.

So I guess there really isn't a real difference, at least as far as
the standard rate schedules go. It seems that the Big Three have
decided that it's easier to compete on the add-ons and special savings
plans, than on regular rates for ordinary customers.


Garrett A. Wollman   [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman      UVM disagrees.


[Moderator's Note: For small to medium amounts of residence or
business usage, there is no difference in rates to speak of. And
frankly as the competition for big business accounts increase, there
is very little difference there either. The more you spend on long
distance, the more you should compare and study the prices, but until
you get to a few hundred dollars per month, the differences are really
very slight. At some point, the pennies and half-pennies per minute
begin to make a noticeable difference.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David McKellar)
Subject: Interesting Uses To Justify Dialup Internet Connection
Organization: Digital Media Networks
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 16:37:29 -0600


I am trying to cost-justify getting a dialup Internet connection (via
SLIP or PPP).  There are much cheaper dialup services that just offer
ftp/telnet/gopher.  The beauty of a "real" connection is that the uses
are pretty much limitless.  I have been trying to think of some things
that you can only do with SLIP or PPP.  Here are some ideas:

    - Client/server in general;
    - NFS mount somebody's filesystem in another city;
    - Get a remote fortune cookie;
    - Have your work interupted by a talk request;
    - Games.

What else haven't I thought of?
To avoid duplication maybe it's best for replies to be mailed
to me and I'll summarize.  Thanks.

 D a v e     M c K e l l a r     d j m @ d m n t o r . U U C P

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Caller ID and Non-Phone Number Display
Date: 22 Jun 1993 19:19:15 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In Saskatchewan, Canada, you cannot have all your outgoing calls have
the caller ID blocked as if you used *67 each time.

However, the phone company (SaskTel) will provide you with an
alternate number that will display each time you make a call in place
of your actual phone number. This number is such that it does not
translate to anyone's actual phone number. I don't know what the cost
is.

Has this approach been used elsewhere rather than allowing blanket
blocking?


Darrell

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven L. Spak)
Subject: Re: What Switch is in Use in My Area?
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 12:39:42 GMT


You're probably working out of the Pikesville 1AESS.  This workhorse
is scheduled for replacement with a DMS in October.  Since each switch
vendor's implementation of a feature is slightly different in
"flavor", you may notice a change after the cutover.

Your Fairfax pal may have a DMS or a 5ESS.  As for what "system"
Washington, D.C. has, it all depends on who makes the switch in your
serving C.O.

Small world, I used to live in Pikesville too. :-)


NOTE: The statements given are mine and not my employer's
 Steven Spak    [e-mail]    Transmission Engineer
 C&P Telephone Company - Washington, D.C.
 Tel:[phone]    Fax:[phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Phiber Optik)
Subject: Re: What Switch is in Use in My Area?
Date: 22 Jun 1993 17:55:17 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Your switch is most likely a 1A ESS.  Your friend's is most likely a
DMS-100 or 5ESS.  Ask him to *70 his call waiting (if he can).  If he
simply gets a stutter-to-steady dialtone, he's a 5ESS.  If he gets two
beeps and a dialtone back, he's a DMS-100.  This is a common way to
tell the difference, there are others.

I'm not sure what DC uses (I'm sure there's more than one office).
I'm not from C&P land.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (James Ian McGowan)
Subject: Alpha Pager Interface
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 21:45:52 GMT


Does any one know of an IBM-PC program that will send plain text files
to an alpha pager?  Alternatively, where can I get a description
of the IXO protocol so that I can write such a program myself? Any
information would be much appreciated.

[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: Fast 19,200 Baud Modems
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 07:28:46 GMT


Thanks to those who sent replies to my previous messages mentioning
the V.fast protocol under development.

I am actually using ZyXel U1496 Plus modems at 19,200 baud over
dialup lines.  ZyXel 19,200 baud protocol is said to be an extension
(proprietary) of V32bis.

The results after just a few days of testing between Milano, Italy,
and a remote location in the country (far from the exchange)
approximatly 40 km from the town are very good. More than 90% of the
times connection can be made at the highest speed, with no falling
back. When connection cannot be made at full speed, usually I am able
to make at least 16,800 baud. If I re-dial immediately I usually get
the top speed. I tried one connection to the ZyXel BBS in California,
and speed over a transatlantic link was 16,800 baud! That was just
ONE call, however.

In checking the information files on various ftp sites, I have read
that ZyXel is following carefully the standardization of V.fast up at
28,800 bauds. They have no committment to port V.fast on the current
series of modems, but their free and public domain upgrade policy
since now leave me with very good hopes. The point, however are:

1/ When will V.fast presumably be available as a standard and as an
implementation?

2/ Is there already some proprietary protocol capable of achieving
28,800 baud implemented on a real modem (commercial product)?

I have been using USR dual standard (V32bis) modems for the
last two years, and ZyXel seems to be a much better solution, with
even better results in terms of successful connections, and less
errors. Furthermore: since one of the two sites is just under the
antenna of a 30kW Shortwave transmitter (in operation), immunity from
RF is another very big issue. According to my experience Zyxel is FAR
more better than USR in this respect.

 For those who want to know: I was surprised to discover that ZyXel
modems are not made in the US, but in Taiwan.

Thanks again for your input. Please e-mail directly since I do not
receive all telecom feeds.


 Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Bull HN Italia, I-20010 Pregnana Mil.
 work: [e-mail]   personal: [e-mail]
 phone: [phone] / 8427 | fax: 8289

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 02:44:17 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Loyalty Program?


> Is there somewhere in particular, besides AT&T's business number, that
> I should call to sign up for this?  I tried calling 800-222-0300 the
> night I read the post here on TELECOM Digest.  At first the operator
> seemed to comprehend what I was talking about but then she started
> going off about discounts of 25% to the one area code I dial the most.
> This did not sound like the "loyalty program" described in the post to
> TD.

You should ask to sign up for FreeTime or FreeMonth.  The appropriate
one depends on the amount of money you spend with AT&T each month.


# Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
# [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Moulton)
Subject: Re: AT&T Loyalty Program?
Date: 22 Jun 1993 14:51:55 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville - CS Department


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve
Forrette) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
>(Michael Rosen) writes:

 >> I tried calling 800-222-0300 the night I read the post here on
 >> TELECOM Digest.  At first the operator seemed to comprehend what I was
 >> asking about but then she started going off about discounts of 25% to
 >> one area code I dial the most.  This did not sound like the
 >> loyalty program" described in the post of TD.

>I called the 800-222-0300 number and asked about the Loyalty Program,
>and the rep knew exactly what I was talking about.

 Same here, however, since I did not meet the minimum average monthly
 long distance billing at home (something like $30) neither the simple
savings plan (25/15% discount) or the loyalty program (check for average
 monthly billing over six months) applied.  As usual with AT&T, the sales
 person seemed to know exactly what was going on.


Steve Moulton ([e-mail]) [phone]

------------------------------

From: Steve Wegert <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Loyalty Program
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 17:05:40 -0600 (CDT)


I too just called the normal 800.222.0300 number and was quickly
helped by the person that answered. She wasn't immediately familiar
with the name 'Loyalty Program', but after describing the plan, she
replied "Oh! You mean the free month thing!"

A few things came out in the conversation:

 1) It _may not_ be available in all states. It just became available in
    Missouri three months ago.

 2) It can't be used in conjunction with AT&T Free Time Rewards program.
    It's one or the other. In my case, the rep looked at my calling pattern
    and suggested that I'd be better off with the Free Month.

 3) There is a direct 800 number for the program. Call 800.438.7100

[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 15:16:22 GMT


Our esteemed Moderator writes...
 > Now I am my own party-line neighbor! :)     PAT]

 So, do you hear any good gossip when you listen in on yourself?  :-)


Steven King, Motorola Cellular  ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: I don't listen to myself! A lot of people could
tell you that.  :)   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 15:45:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Andy Rabagliati <andyr@wizzy.
com> writes:

> I lived in rural Pennsylvania, and phone service was provided courtesy
> of Commonwealth Telephone. CT charged extra for Tone Dial, and so, on
> principle, I declined. Can you say ATDP .. ?

When I moved into my present house (1985), at that time Pac Bell was
also charging extra for TT, and like andy, I also declined, having
plenty of black rotary dial old WE indestructable phones.

Then I got a modem.  Being used to ATDT... at work, I typed it
followed by the number.  When I heard the beeps, I realized that it
wasn't going to work, but the phone at the other end was already
ringing and the modem picking up ...

A little experimentation showed that TT worked just fine.  Time
passed.  I had some tone phones now.  Then I got a letter from Pa.
Bell.  Somewhat paraphrased: "We have detected TTs on your line.  We
investigated and found that you have TT service through our error.
Because its our error, we won't charge you for the past use, but
either start paying or we will remove the feature."

So I called and told them to remove the service.  All my TT equipment
also had pulse, and I refused on principal to pay extra for TT.  They
said fine, and that's the last I ever heard from them.  Of course, I
never had to switch anything to pulse dialing.  Since then, they no
longer charge extra so its all moot now.  All the WE dial phones are
gone.  (They sell for around $5 at flea markets.)  Now, most of my
phones are old WE TT phones.  (Which can be bought for around $10 at
the same flea markets, and often for a dollar or two at yard sales.)


Rich Greenberg Work: ETi Solutions, Oceanside CA 619-631-5280 N6LRT
TinselTown, USA Play: [e-mail] 310-649-0238 I speak for
myself only.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 93 13:25:14 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Gary Segal)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines


[e-mail] (David S. Channin) writes:

 >God, I thought I had moved to Mars or something!  Wait till I ask
>about OC3 ATM!!!

 Nope ... Mars is about 40 miles north of Pittsburgh.  Nowhere near
Hershey.  :-)

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #416
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06488;
          24 Jun 93 4:58 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19546
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 24 Jun 1993 02:24:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03183
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 24 Jun 1993 02:24:03 -0500
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 02:24:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #417

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 24 Jun 93 02:24:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 417

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    All IXCs Must File Tariffs; What it Means (Paul Robinson)
    New House and Telephone Connection (Thomas Hinders)
    Range Enhancement for Tropez 900DX (Mike Detlef)
    Telecom Eireann Introduces DASH Card (Robin Brookes)
    Caller ID and Overseas Calls (Georg Schwarz)
    Anonymity, Privacy, and the Technological Imperative (Jerry Leichter)
    Summary: SKY-PAGE and Cellular Integration (Jody Kravitz)
    NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles (Kenneth R. Crudup)
    Buying a Cellular Phone (Justin Leavens)
    PBX Information Wanted (Tommi Chen)
    Sir?  SIR??  How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI! (Toby Nixon)
    Are You a Prodigy Deadbeat? (Paul Barnett)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993  23:32:14 EDT
Subject:  All IXCs Must File Tariffs; What it Means


 From the {Washington Post} Business Section, Page D1, 22 June 1993:

"MCI lost its appeal to the [US] Supreme Court of a lower court ruling
that found the FCC had improperly dismissed a complaint by AT&T, which
argued that all long-distance telephone companies should file their
rates with the Commission.  The justices let stand the lower court
ruling without comment."

                        ----------

Now what does this mean?

1.  In general, every long distance company (also called
    an Interexchange Company or IXC) has to file
    tariff schedules unless exempted by law.

2.  An IXC offering long distance service without a
    tariff (and not exempted) could be in a position to be
    unable to collect for calls made.

3.  Whether this affects aggregators or companies that
    handle services for others (such as the infamous
    Integretel, and whether their correspondents have to
    also file, is another issue.)

The question comes up because, for example, where I live, the local
telephone company (C&P Telephone) has tariffs on file permitting
disconnection of telephone service for nonpayment of IXC charges
billed through C&P Telephone.  Now, if the IXC did not have tariffs
filed with the FCC, it raises a new question about whether the local
phone company could legally issue a disconnect for IXC charges which
are not tariffed.

For example, if the local phone company provides call waiting, but
never filed a tariff for it, they may not charge for the service, and
any bills issued for it are invalid.  Now, since long distance
companies (except AT&T) are not considered 'monopoly' providers or
carry 'protected status' (the way the local company does) the general
rules which forbid being able to collect for non-tariffed services may
or may not apply to them.  Does anyone have an idea on this?

This may be a serious problem for some Interexchange Company that has
some large bills from customers.  "Well, we just discovered that you
never filed tariffs for your service, and our legal department says
that you can't collect against us by suing in court and the local
phone company can't disconnect us on these grounds, we're not going to
pay you.  Too bad."  (If you think some companies won't do this if
they could, I think you need to take a long look at the world.)


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

"These (uniformed) opinions are mine alone; no one else is (stupid
enough to be) responsible for them."


[Moderator's Note: Bear in mind that although you could assume that
stance with an IXC, the IXC would be under no obligation in the future
to give you service until you voluntarily paid the old bill. Where
this could pose a problem is if the IXC came out with a really good
product (or pricing on old products) and you needed it. They can also
still legally report you to a credit bureau regards your refusal to
pay. Reports to credit bureaus and legal action to collect (a suit)
are two different matters. So you could be known to the IXC's which
share common information on customer payment histories, etc as a
deadbeat even though (one of them) had been legally unable to collect
the bill. Others then say pay in advance!   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 23 Jun 1993 08:46:08 EDT
From: Hinders, Thomas <[e-mail]>
Subject: New House and Telephone Connection


I'm moving into a new house, the telephone jacks (one per room) have
their cable pulled to a common point in the basement.

My question ... what is the "best" way to connect these jacks to the
Telephone access box?  Should I, for example pull a single cable from
the access box to the basemet to some sort of wiring/punch down block?

The Telephone Co "box" (I'm sure there is a more technical name for it)
is a gray plastic box on the outside of the house.

Reply directly and I'll summarize for all.


Thanks in advance.

Tom Hinders/Soft-Switch
[phone] (v/vm)  [phone] (f)
Internet:  [e-mail]
X.400:  C=US A=Telemail P=Softswitch S=Hinders G=Thomas

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mike Detlef)
Subject: Range Enhancement for Tropez 900DX
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 08:25:06 -0500 (EST)


Several weeks ago a thread appeared regarding 900 MHz cordless phones.
Somebody mentioned attaching an external 900 Mhz ham radio antenna to
the base unit on the Tropez 900 DX as a means to improve the range.
Having just purchased the DL version (no speakerphone in base unit -
all else the same) I'm wondering if anyone has actually tried this and
if so, what was the impact?

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 09:36:15
Subject: Telecom Eireann Introduces DASH Card


I thought Digesters would be interested in a leaflet I came across
in the headquarters of Telecom Eireann yesterday.

It displays on it a card looking for all the world like a standard
prepay 'phone card for the countrywide TE 'phonecard system ... but
it's called a DASH card and the European circle of stars logo and map
of Europe gives the first clue that something broader is here. The
blurb reads thus:-

   "Once you have credit on your DASH card you can use it for the
   follow services:-
   *To travel on Dublin Bus routes 39 & 39X Cityspeed;
   *To pay your way across the Westlink [Motorway Toll Bridge in
   Dublin];
   *To cover the cost of parking in Marlborough Street Car Park;
   *To make public telephone calls from selected Carphones.

   ...... *You will be one of the first 2,000 people in Ireland to use
   this "smart card"

   ...... DASH is part of the Gaudi Project, which is designed to
   examine different aspects of urban management. Dublin is one of
   six European cities participating in the experiment."

Details elsewhere on the leaflet reveals Barcelona, Bologna,
Marseille, Rome & Trondheim.

I'm endeavouring to obtain one ... perhaps Digesters in these other
cities would care to respond and let us know how things are developing
there.


Rev. Robin K.Brookes   E-MAIL
74 Gracepark Road      Fidonet: Robin Brookes 2:263/151
Dublin 9     Ireland   Internet:  [e-mail]
TEL + 353 1 372505     or   [e-mail]
FAX + 353 1 677 3552

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Georg Schwarz)
Subject: Caller ID and Overseas Calls
Date: 23 Jun 1993 14:05:05 GMT
Organization: TUBerlin/ZRZ


Is the calling party's telephone number displayed on US/Canadian
caller ID displays when the call originates from overseas (outside the
+1 hemisphere)?  In case this feature is (not yet) implemented is it
already technically possible? Is the necessary information (calling
party's numer, country code etc.) being transfered "across the
border"? Is there an international standard on the format of this
data? What about the legal situation?


[Moderator's Note: For my new service 'Telepassport' I will be getting
the numbers of overseas callers, but it is not yet very common.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 93 15:39:50 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Anonymity, Privacy, and the Technological Imperative


Our Moderator quotes with apparent approval:

>  A top executive of AT&T pointed out that "... we are not in the
>  business of selling privacy ... we sell communications services. ...
>  it was a flaw in the technology [that we didn't have Caller ID].  It
>  would seem people have forgotten that information was always available
>  before ... the telephone is nothing more than an extension of the
>  human voice ... just as you speak with your unaided voice and bear
>  responsibility for your speech, so do you bear the same responsibility
>  when using the telephone to assist in speaking ...

It's an accident of the technology that the microphone on a telephone
is cut off when the handset is on-hook.  It's also a modern accident
of technology that the voice path isn't cut through until the call
supervises.

Perhaps the Telcos should change the specs for phones so that the
microphone remains live at all times.  For the appropriate charge, you
can listen in to the open microphone.  This could have many uses:
Monitoring of your home while you are away, for example.  (Just what
IS the baby sitter doing?)  Or checking ahead of time to make sure you
aren't interrupting anything important before ringing through.

You think that invades the privacy of your home?  That's not the
telephone company's responsibility: They don't sell privacy.  They
"extend your voice".  If I come to your door, I can hear what's going
on inside your house; why shouldn't I have the same ability when I
dial your phone?  Don't you sometimes listen at the door a bit before
deciding if it's OK to knock?  Don't I deserve the same ability when
calling you?

After all, you can always put your phone in a sound-proof box.  Or
remember to dial the "disable remote listening" code -- forced on a
reluctant Telco by the local PUC -- after each call.

(BTW, if you think this is completely fanciful, note that many newer
workstations have built-in microphones and digitizers.  In at least
some models -- Sun's come to mind -- there is no "off" switch; control
of the mike is entirely up to the software.)

As usual, the debates on Caller ID rapidly decay into absolutist
positions.  The limited amount of space available only makes it worse:
It's impossible to fully define one's position, so of course the
absolutists pick for you the definitions *they* prefer to attack.

I know of no one who has claimed that Caller ID should NEVER be
allowed.  *I* certainly make no such claim.  What Caller ID opponents
object to is the inability of the caller to control it.  The telephone
companies did not originally wish to provide ANY means of blocking
Caller ID.  I believe that the implementation in New Jersey remains
that way.  Now, Caller ID proponents hold out blocking as an argument
FOR Caller ID.  However, the Telco's have made it as inconvenient as
they can get away with.  Per call blocking puts the onus on the caller
to perform a mechanical action every time.  In some cases, that
mechanical action is quite inconvenient: On my exchange, you MUST wait
for the second dial tone after typing *67; you cannot dial ahead.  On
one of my lines, I use a computer to dial most calls; it inserts the
*67 for me.  On the other, it's such a pain that I rarely remember to
do it.

Here in Connecticut, you can have free per-call blocking.  You can
have per-line blocking for $1/month -- IF you first file a notarized
statement that Caller ID represents a "threat" to you.  I find it
impossible to imagine a philosophical justification for charging for a
service that is (a) a variation of what you provide for free; (b)
costs you nothing either way; (c) you only provide to people who have
sworn that they are in exigent circumstances.

By the way, the Caller ID zeolots immediately responded with a call
for "block blocking".  Curiously, I've heard NO arguments AGAINST that
from those of us who dislike Caller ID *as the Telco's have tried to
impose it*.  You are free to ask for my identication before talking to
me; I am free to decline to provide it.

I tried to draw a distinction between anonymity and privacy.  The
zealots ignored the distinction.  To me, privacy is the right to keep
certain things secret WHEN I DON'T USE THEM TO ABUSE THE RIGHTS OF
OTHERS.  Anonymity is the ability to remain hidden even while abusing
those rights.  I know of no objections raised to Call Trace or other
techniques that can be brought into play when the issue is abuse,
whether harrassing telephone calls, fraud, or whatever.

The post office has never required me to put a return address on my
envelopes, but will work to trace the sender in cases of mail fraud.
The return address on Internet mail is determined entirely by the
system administrator of the machine sending the mail.  If I don't like
my system administrator's policy, I can go elsewhere; I have no
alternative to the telephone company.  If I abuse my mail privileges,
there are techniques available to trace my mail.  These generally
require the cooperation of multiple system administrators, and are not
available on a routine basis to people who are just curious about who
is behind a given E-mail address.

Even if I come to your door, no law says I have to give you my true
name (there is no third party to check), or any name at all.  Salesmen
give their company's name, not their personal name.  Because of
various abuses, they may not maintain their ANONYMITY in many cases:
They MUST give you the proper name of the company they work for and a
way to contact it.  But they are under no obligation to give up their
PRIVACY by showing you their driver's license so that you can be sure
of their personal name.


 Jerry


[Moderator's Note: It is not an 'accident of technology' that a telephone
 mouthpiece is shut off when the phone is on hook. There has never
been a time that telco left the mouthpiece always on line only to lose
the ability to do so due to how the system operates. There was a time
however when information as to the calling party was conveniently avail-
able, only to have that information unavailable for many years.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 08:26:31 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jody Kravitz)
Subject: Summary: SKY-PAGE and Cellular Integration


Many thanks to everyone who posted suggestions or wrote directly to
me.  My original request involved seeking a way to integrate the use
of my SKY Pager with my cellular voicemail.  The SKY Page system, like
many paging systems in use today does not use a bank of DID numbers,
but rather requires a PIN to be entered after dialing an access
number.  I couldn't figure out how to get my cellar system to out-dial
the required sequence.  The solution I ended up with is the simple one
I wanted, but was not "obvious" due to mis-information given to me by
two customer service reps from my own cellular provider and two
customer service reps from SKYTEL's customer service.

Several people pointed out that writing code for a voicemail system to
do the required two-step outdial is not that difficult.  At least one
person pointed out that Cellular One in their area had a voicemail
system could out-dail to the SKYTEL (SKY Page) paging system.  A phone
call to LA Cellular produced a rather long list of paging systems
their voicemail system knew how to out-dail to.  Several of these
systems are systems which use an access number and a pager PIN, in the
same way that my SKY Pager does.  A little nudging to the LA Cellular
rep produced the name of the vendor of their voicemail system: Octel.

Knowing that such systems existed, I called SKYTEL again.  It turns
out that they have several access numbers which are _INTENDED_ for
machine access.  One substitutes three beeps for the usual voice
announcment and accepts DTMF input.  Another actually answers with a
modem (1200 baud, I believe).  Armed with these numbers, I went to the
U.S. West office in person and attempted to placed a service order.
The sales rep had never heard of what I wanted but made a call to the
switch, confimed that "it could be done", and took the order.  It is
obvious that the switch people knew what to do because they instructed
the service rep to obtain the PIN only.  They did not want any of the
access number I had collected.  Peculiarly, their computer order-entry
system requires that they enter the "pager frequency and CAP code".
This annoyed me since they shouldn't be able to broadcast on the
frequency assigned to another vendor except by out-dialing to their
switch.

It took them 24 hours (and opening a "trouble ticket") to get it
working, but it is working reliably now.  The system is "nice" enough
to out-dail my cellular number after the SKY Page pin, so the page is
not an ambiguous "Tone Only" page.  Their voicemail system vendor:
Octel.

The Octel system must be told manually, at the switch, that my account
is to be out-dialed to the SKY Page system.  The audio menus which I
access via "administrative options" that would normally allow me to
change the out-dial number list my pager's PIN, not the SKY Page
access number.  I have not experimented yet to see if I can enter a
differrent SKY Page PIN.

I'm posting this follow-up in the hopes that others who want to link
voicemail with non-DID paging systems are not discouraged by mis-
informed customer service people.  There _ARE_ commercial systems
that already know how to do this.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 12:01:21 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles
Organization: AT&T


I've got a portable cellular (Uniden CP5500), and I've got the
rapid-charger for it (charges a dead 6V .6Ah pack in < one hour). This
charger also has a "discharge" button that will first completely
discharge the battery in two hours or less, depending on initial
charge, then recharge it. This feature, of course, is to prevent the
"memory effect" from occuring. It also trickle-charges the battery
after the green "full" light comes on.

Since I tend to not drain the battery completely, I tend to
discharge/recharge it if I know I won't need the phone for three
hours, to avoid the memory effect.  Yesterday, I remembered that
NiCd's only have a limited number of charge/ discharge cycles. I'm
wondering if I'm using my battery up before the end of it's expected
service life.

Is this really a problem? Or, should I simply replace the phone in the
normal recharger slot? If I do that on a minimal charge, will repeated
rapid-charges bring on the memory effect? I like having the battery
completely full, as I don't know when I'll need to be on it a long time,
so not placing it on the charger after only an hour or two of standby
doesn't seem optimal.


Kenneth R. Crudup, ATT BL, 1600 Osgood St, N. Andover, MA 01845-1043
MV20-3T5B, [phone].    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 09:17:20 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Buying a Cellular Phone


I noticed this weekend that many stores were selling the Motorola
MC750 cellular phone for under $100 ($99 at Circuit City, $79 at
Hollytron, and $69 at L.A. Tronics). I made some visits to the stores
and noticed a couple of things:

1. Circuit City does not extend its "Low Price Guarantee" to cellular
phones due to "regulatory conditions".

2. When I showed my Hollytron ad to the Circuit City salesman, he said
that the price listed was only available if you signed up for the LA
Cellular "Standard" use package, and that if I took that package, he
would sell me the phone at the $79 price too.

3. L.A. Tronics said that the phone was really $179, but that LA
Cellular was offering a $110 rebate on it, regardless of which carrier
you picked.  Oddly enough, he immediately put a PacTel Cellular
application in front of me (even odder since they were located
adjacent to a LA Cellular office).

4. Both PacTel and LA Cellular seem identical in service price. Are
there any preferences out there?

Anyone know the skinny on this deal? I got so confused and fed up with
the bull from these salesdroids that I decided to just forget the
whole thing.  They all seemed much more interested in signing me up
for service than selling me a phone. I know it's illegal in CA to
require activation at the time of purchase, and I believe it's also
illegal to offer different prices depending on activation. And what's
up with this rebate?


Justin Leavens : Microcomputer Specialist : University of Southern California
    [e-mail]    My opinion is that my opinions are my opinions

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tommi Chen)
Subject: PBX Information Wanted
Date: 23 Jun 1993 06:46:56 GMT
Organization: National University of Singapore


Where can I find information about PBX, their features and comparison
between vendor like AT&T, Alcatel, Erricson, etc.?


Thank you,

[e-mail]   NUS

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Toby Nixon)
Subject: Sir?  SIR??  How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI!
Date: 23 Jun 93 00:26:37 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA


Has anyone else noticed in the new radio commercial "introducing"
1-800-COLLECT, that the operator answers the phone with this line:

"1-800-COLLECT.  What number would you like to call collect, sir?"

No pause, no listening to the caller first, just call them sir.  How
do THEY know its a "sir" calling?

Give me a break.  You'd think in this day and age they'd be a bit more
sensitive to this kind of thing. What's DOUBLY surprising is that
they've been playing this ad for several weeks now here in Seattle,
and nobody from MCI has heard it, noticed the problem, and caused it
to be replaced!


Toby

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Are you a Prodigy Deadbeat?
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 11:11:16 CDT


Steve Blow, a {Dallas Morning News} columnist, laments that he got his
first call from a bill collector this week.  He bought a personal
computer, and subscribed to Prodigy for about a year.  However, the
kids weren't using it, so he ignored the membership renewal notices.

A few weeks ago, he got a bill marked "Past Due", with a snippy letter
that informed him that he owed $42.09, and his account was about to be
turned over to a collection agency.  He wrote back, saying that he had
purposely allowed his membership to lapse, and he resented the threat
of being turned over to a collection agency.  The Great Lakes
Collection Bureau promptly responded by phone and by mail, complete
with a convoluted explanation of why he owed the money.

The collection agency suggested he contact a particular person at
Prodigy.  Steve called, only to find that (a) no one had ever heard of
her, and (b) the referenced account number was obviously bogus.
However, they finally confirmed that he was "in a voluntary disconnect
status with no balance due", and would call off the collection agency.

Finally, he wanted to determine why all this happened.  Steve Hein, a
Prodigy spokesman, explained that they automatically renewed
memberships.  However, there have so many complaints, that they have
decided to discontinue it.

Steve's final comment:  "Maybe they know a lot about computers.  But
when it comes to business, they're no prodigy."


Paul Barnett
MPP OS Development     (214)-497-4846
Convex Computer Corp.  Richardson, TX

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #417
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07183;
          24 Jun 93 5:50 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30684
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 24 Jun 1993 03:36:56 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04291
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 24 Jun 1993 03:36:07 -0500
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 03:36:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #419

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 24 Jun 93 03:36:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 419

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Seth B. Rothenberg)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Alan Boritz)
    Re: AT&T Loyalty Program? (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: AT&T Loyalty Program? (Michael Rosen)
    Re: AT&T and its Many Calling Plans (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Phone Connections in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands (ole!linqdev)
    Re: Names Added To Caller ID (John Macdonald)
    Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland (Juha Veijalainen)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones, One Number (John Gilbert)
    Re: DID Trunks and Circular Reasoning (Mike King)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
Before submitting articles for publication, please read a copy of our
file 'writing.to.telecom'. All article submissions MUST be sent to our
email address: [e-mail] -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Date: 23 Jun 93 12:12:12 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rich
Greenberg) writes:

> A little experimentation showed that TT worked just fine.  Time
> passed.  I had some tone phones now.  Then I got a letter from Pa.
> Bell.  Somewhat paraphrased: "We have detected TTs on your line.  We
> investigated and found that you have TT service through our error.
> Because its our error, we won't charge you for the past use, but
> either start paying or we will remove the feature."

> So I called and told them to remove the service.  All my TT equipment
> also had pulse, and I refused on principal to pay extra for TT.  They
> said fine, and that's the last I ever heard from them.  Of course, I
> never had to switch anything to pulse dialing.

When I lived in New York, we had touch-tone phones on lines with no
touch tone service.  Then one day, it stopped working.  Here in Pgh,
it has not worked for me since I got my first phone service from Bell.

Incidentally, we have Centrex at work and rotary phones don't work.
Do you think it's worth complaining to [e-mail] (?)
that the FCC regs are stupid and hinder development of the nation's
phone network?  They should stop charging for TT and start charging
for pulse ...


Seth

------------------------------

Date: 23 Jun 93 06:40:53 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines


[e-mail] (Rich Greenberg) writes:

> A little experimentation showed that TT worked just fine.  Time
> passed.  I had some tone phones now.  Then I got a letter from Pa.
> Bell.  Somewhat paraphrased: "We have detected TTs on your line.  We
> investigated and found that you have TT service through our error.
> Because its our error, we won't charge you for the past use, but
> either start paying or we will remove the feature."

Rochester Telephone had a much more rude procedure, which fit their
nasty reputation and bad attitude (in the early 80's).  They had their
switches set to make extremely loud obnoxious noises in your ear if
you tried to dial tone on a pulse co line.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: AT&T Loyalty Program?
Date: 23 Jun 1993 03:52:13 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


If you call the number that is listed on your telephone bill for
contacting AT&T they should have the information. The number I have is
1-800-222-0300.


Steven H. Lichter    COEI GTECalif

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: AT&T Loyalty Program?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 05:33:41 GMT


I did call yesterday and finally got an operator who understood what I
was talking about and signed me up for the program.

Regarding the Simple Savings Plan ... he suggested this to me in the
same call.  He observed that most of our calls are going to area code
703.  If I were to get the SSP, those calls would be discounted 25% as
you stated and all others would be discounted 15%, granted total LD
calls totalled $30 or more.

The thing is that I believe the fact that area code 703 showed up as a
frequently dialed area code is a fluke merely because I've called my
friend in Virginia predominantly more times than I have called friends
in DC or other areas.  And since my sister and I make most of the LD
calls in this house, when we move out this plan won't do our parents
much good.

I would think maybe the Evening Plus program would serve us better.
That is $7.50 for the first hour of calls after 5pm and .10/minute
after that hour.  We don't, or at least try not to, make too many
calls during the day (long distance, of course).

So, that's 12.5 cents per minute and then .10/minute.  So, compared to
regular dialed rates that may come to almost a 25% savings, no?


Mike

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: AT&T and its Many Calling Plans
Date: 23 Jun 1993 01:48:22 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael Rosen) writes:

> Also, do any of them offer anything like AT&T's Call Manager --
> allowing a subtotalling of the bill by user-specified codes (for
> easier splitting up of bills)?

Sprint offers a similar featured, called Account Codes or something
like that.  You can have either validated or unvalidated account
codes.  When I used Sprint, I had the unvalidated option.  For
$5/month/line, they will cause a prompt for an accounting code of two
to five digits (I had to prespecify the length at order time) for
every 1+ call I made.  Any code of the right length would work, so
this option is not designed for security purposes.  The validated
option will cause only certain codes to be valid, much like a calling
card PIN, and is designed to be used in cases where security is
desired.  Note that with Sprint's offering, a code is always required,
and is automatically prompted for for all 1+ calls.  This is good for
situations such as multiple roommates, since it is not possible to
forget to enter a code.  The bad part is that if you only need to
categorize calls occasionally, you now have an extra step for every
call you make.  Also, Sprint's Account Codes are available for
cellular phones that have Sprint as their default carrier.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Phone Connections in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 8:10:09 PDT
From: ole!linqdev![e-mail]


The most important factor when calling from overseas:

Call your long distance company( -ies) and get their local toll-free
numbers in the countries you are visiting for you to be able to use a
US company with lower US prices for international long distance. I
know for sure that at least AT&T, MCI, and Sprint has local numbers
most places.

Some aspects on 'connecting' with non-local equipment:

Touch tone is universally accepted (I have brought severral phones
from the US to Norway and Norwegian phones to the US.) If you try to
use pulse signalling, be aware that the dial is different in Oslo and
Sweden (i.e. one click is 0, two clicks is 1 etc.)

Most switchboards use 0 to get operator and 9 to get an external line.

Connecting any equipment to the telephone system requires PTT
approval. (Just for the record.)

I have never seen a phone in these three countries that is permanently
connected (i.e. without a jack, english style).

Even if the wall jacks is not of an RJ11 type, the phone cord might be
connected to the phone with this type of a plug.  The easiest way to
connect might be to bring a RJ11 y-piece and at least one spare phone
cord, so that you may be able to connect both the original phone and
your modem at the same time (for experimenting). With all the trying
and failing I have done, I have never ruined any equipment (telco's or
mine).

How to connect to the your modem to the 'hole in the wall'?

- Best suggestion: bring two scredrivers (one phillips and one flat)
  and be prepared to remove the remove the jack cover.

If you do not want to perform surgery to stay in touch, this is what I
know about the three scandinavian countries:

Norway:

The traditional wall jack is a has three prongs:    \   /
where the the two on the top are the ring and         |
tip. You might be able to plug banana jacks into      c
these two holes. If it is unclear whick ones are      o
the top ones, they are the ones that are closer       r
together.                                             d

To make things a bit more interesting, you might find a US-style RJ11
(or similar) jack in the wall, in which case you can use a regular US
phone cord.  You might also find that the phone cord is connected to a
plug with a RJ11 (or similar) where the plug is connected to the jack
in the wall. Here you can connect your US phone cord the the
abovementioned plug.

If you look on the phone-side of the phone cord (if you have a touch
tone phone) and find a RJ11 - beware: if the conditions in the above
paragraph does not apply, the phone cord is wired differently than the
US standard. The ring and tip is connector one and three rather than
two and three (US standard) on a four connector cord.

Denmark:

I have no experience other than having seen and used a regular hotel
phone in Copenhagen. Their wall jacks looks similar to the Norwegian,
only you will not be able to use banana jacks. (The prongs are flat
like US AC jacks, not round like European AC jacks or banana jacks).

Sweden:

The wall jacks used to have four prongs, I do not know for sure if
they still do.

Finally, my source of knowledge:

1)    I used to live in Norway until three years ago, and I just came
    back from a vacation there
2)    A curious mind...

Have a nice trip, and don't forget to bring a warm sweater!  Email me
on [e-mail] if you want more travelling hints.


Ole C.    Everthing IMHO. It is not I<my employers>HO.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Macdonald)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 23:52:01 -0400
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
Subject: Re: Names Added To Caller ID


In article <[e-mail]>:

> Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]> writes:

>> The issue in Caller ID is not anonymity; it's privacy.  Let's take an

> No.  It's strictly anonymity.

It's a breath mint.  No it's a candy mint.

The whole problem stems from only allowing one or the other.

What *should* be provided by the telephone system is the flexibility
for people to be able to choose the freedoms and restrictions they
wish for themselves and the people they talk to.

They should be able to choose whether they provide ID on their
outgoing calls -- providing a "default" choice (possibly multiple
default choices based upon type of number called [business/private]
and special lists) as well as per-call over-rides.  (And, of course,
the over-ride to provide ID should be different from the over-ride to
suppress it to allow specifying what it should be if it is unclear
what the default would be - the use of *67 to invert the possibly
unknown state is not very good user interface design.)

In addition, they should be able to choose whether they require ID on
incoming calls.  (Again there are lots of variations -- types of calls
are "ID suppressed", "ID not available", "ID provided" -- the source of
the call can be business/private -- what to do on an unaccepted call
could be "reject", "forward to alternate number", "forward to
voicemail").

Ignoring all of the special cases, this permits four types of calls to
be placed.  The caller provides ID or not; the callee accepts non-ID
calls or not.  If the caller does not provide ID and the calle
requires it, then the call will not go through.  This is not a
disaster.  The caller just decides whether the importance of making
that call is greater than the desire for anonymity.

Requiring all callers to provide ID by telephone system edict affects
people who desire anonymity.  They cannot make anonymous calls even if
the recipient *might* have been willing to accept them.

Personally, I would probably choose to suppress ID as the default.  If
it were possible, I would suppress ID on calls to commercial numbers,
while providing it on calls to private numbers.  I would accept calls
whether ID were provided or not.  If I was getting calls that I
considered harassing, then I would use Call Screen to block just those
calls.

I have no great desire to have the default result of calling a
business phone be to get on their lists.  (Mailing lists and junk mail
have been bad enough over the last couple of decades -- junk phone
number lists promise to be much worse, in my opinion.)

I *would* be quite happy to over-ride the suppression of ID if some
business was providing a service based on ID that game *me* some
special value.  Such a customer oriented approach would include the
telephone equivalent of the checkbox to indicate whether you are
willing to permit them to market your phone number, in the same way
that many companies now provide a method for you to indicate whether
you are willing for them to market your address as part of their
mailing list.  However, this insistance that I have to provide it to
any business that I make any sort of telephone call to strongly
suggests that there will be lots of telephone list marketers coming
out in the near future.  (I know that not everyone is forced to
provide ID.  Here in Bell Canada area, you have the choice of paying
0.85 *per call* to suppress caller ID, which I consider extortion.)


John Macdonald  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: <FNAHA![e-mail]>
Date: 23 JUN 93 07:02
Subject: Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland


Haakon Styri <[e-mail]> wrote:

> originator of this kind of '900' service. This stuff is well known in
> Europe, and it's a method for generating traffic _into_ a country.
> This would usually only benefit the network operators, but it's likely
> that arrangements have been made between network operators and "good"
> customers (those generating a lot of traffic into the network) to
> split the profit.

> Now, the interesting thing -- knowing the state of the economy in the
> East European countries I wouldn't have been surprised to see services
> in this countries advertised in the US and Canada. But the other way
> round seems to be a bit weird. Can someone enlighten me?

It might be the same thing that happens in Finland.  A service
provider makes a deal with, lets say an Australian phone company.  The
service provider advertises its phone number in Finnish newspapers
(Calls are of course directed to Australia, but many callers do not
understand that). Profit is split between the service provider and the
Australian phone company.  So far so good.  But who is doing the
actual billing?

Local phone companies and/or Finnish Telecom bill their customers.
Some customers have accumulated many thousands of dollars in phone
bills -- quite often from these expensive 'service' numbers abroad and
in Finland.  Finnish Telecom has paid the Australians, the Australians
have paid the Finnish service provider, but _the person who actually
called has not paid anything_!  Quite often people racking up huge
phone bills leave their phone bills unpaid.

In the end only local phone companies and/or Finnish Telecom in
Finland suffer.  This is why this sort of operation is going to be
banned -- how, I don't know.

(BTW, this example is straight from a news article published not so
long ago.  There are of course other foreign phone companies involved,
not just the Australian company).


 Juha Veijalainen    4ge system analyst, tel. [phone]
Unisys Finland    Internet: [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones, One Number
Organization: Motorola, LMPS
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 04:26:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Schmidt) writes:

> According to a recent issue of {Mobile Office} magazine, the FCC has
> stated that this practice (cloning ESN's) violates FCC regulations.
> {Mobile Office} says that they will no longer accept advertisements for
> this service.

Did {Mobile Office} say which rule in particular this violated?  It
does violate section 2.3.2 of EIA/TIA-IS-88 (which replaced EIA-553),
but last I heard EIA standards were not enforced by the FCC. Does the
FCC incorporate IS-88 by reference in a section of their rules?

IS-88 section 2.3.2 Says:

The serial number is a 32-bit binary number that uniquely identifies a
mobile station to any cellular system.  It must be factory-set and not
readily alterable in the field.  The circuitry that provides the
serial number must be isolated form fraudulent contact and tampering.
Attempts to change the serial number circuitry should render the
mobile station inoperative ...

The intent of the EIA standard is clear, but I question if there is a
specific FCC rule that addresses this issue.


John Gilbert   KA4JMC   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 14:56:02 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: DID Trunks and Circular Reasoning


In TELECOM Digest, V13, #416, [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
writes:

> I have been investigating the possibility of starting a voicemail
> service.  I got information on voicemail hardware and on add-on
> hardware to support DID service.  I called Bell of PA to ask whether I
> can start out with two-way trunks and then have the same numbers moved
> to DID trunks when business picks up?

> The Bell of PA rep told me that they can't answer that question.  They
> said that a regular phone number is not necessarily usable as a DID
> number, and they could not tell me whether I would get numbers that
> could be used as DID numbers, and they could not reserve a block of
> numbers for me.

> I told the rep that I know that small businesses go from keyswitch to
> PBX systems all the time, and they don't change their phone numbers.
> They basically refused to tell me anything until I place an order.  I
> did not bother asking if that's cash-up-front.  They said if you want
> business planning advice, hire a telephone consultant.

> Can anyone suggest a better approach?  (One suggestion I got was to go
> for broke, and try to get the start-up capital to buy the hardware and
> phone service, then advertise and try to get customers.  I'd prefer to
> avoid this hassle.  That's no longer a 'small business' in my book.)

> It crossed my mind to get extreme and rent a room in a neighborhood
> that is not served by Bell of PA, but by GTE or some other service :-)

If you called the regular business office, I'm not surprised that you
got such a response.  The clerks answering those phones can take your
order for key trunks and such, but special services, such as DID, are
beyond their comprehension.  If you're not ready to place an order for
something they understand, they don't want to talk to you.

Find the number for Bell of PA's marketing department, and give them a
call.  They *want* your business, and will be happy to discuss your
various options and may be willing to consult with you, too.  They
should know what numbers can be converted to DID and where DID is
available.  (Technically, what you want to do IS possible.)  Caveat:
some of the marketeers are better than others.


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #419
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09737;
          24 Jun 93 7:44 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03668
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 24 Jun 1993 03:09:51 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26183
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 24 Jun 1993 03:09:11 -0500
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 03:09:11 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #418

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 24 Jun 93 03:09:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 418

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Traffic Chokes for High Volume Subscribers (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Step-by-Step Offices (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: Step-by-Step Offices (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Step-by-Step Offices (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Caller-ID and Privacy (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Caller-ID and Privacy (Conrad Kimball)
    Re: Caller-ID and Privacy (Darrell Broughton)
    Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911? (John Nagle)
    Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911? (Timothy Hu)
    Re: Leech Zmodem (Paul Houle)
    Re: Leach Zmodem (Koos van den Hout)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 09:05:03 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Traffic Chokes for High Volume Subscribers


Several people have mentioned exchanges grouped for mass calling such
as for radio station call-in use.

On Long Island, 516-955 (Deer Park) is used for most of the stations
such as WALK AM/FM whose number is 955-9750 with the 9750 being
translated to 97.5 Mhz and used for requests.

If, on the other hand, the station goes to the listener participation
format, then there is a direct line - 475-WALK.

Another one is WBLI, who, I think, uses their call sign as the number.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

------------------------------

From: Terry Kennedy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Step-by-Step Offices
Date: 24 Jun 93 00:04:56 EDT
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


In article <[e-mail]>, Telecom Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Why do you consider it sad? If you were served by
> one for any length of time you'd not feel that way! I had a number out
> of the Chicago-Wabash CO back in the 1970's when it was SxS. They did
> not call that office 'the Wabash Cannonball' for nothing ... the setup
> of calls was very noisy; the connections were nasty. We didn't know
> any better ... then in 1975 they cut Wabash over to ESS, call-waiting,
> the whole bit. I would not go back to those switches for anything.  PAT]

  Are you sure the "Cannonball" wasn't panel? SxS and Panel are two
very different beasts, each with their own unique "features". Panel is
known for its background noise and the utter lack of synchronization
of audible with _anything_ (such as calling a busy number and getting
ring back, and having it change to busy in the middle of the second
ring), while SxS is quieter (except for a sound like cats being
tortured if the mute contacts fail).

  SxS had some great "pheatures", like letting you call anywhere (into
the TWX exchanges, into "inward", into supposedly-undialable prefixes
such as the ones used for incoming WATS, etc.) Since there was no way
to back out of a bad routing decision, no translations, etc. in a SxS
(aside from some experiments with electronic control), all sorts of
things were possible. Of course, my goals as a 15-year-old and Bell's
idea of a useful feature set were, ummm, "disparate".

  Because SxS couldn't adapt easily to changes, they were killed off
long before the equipment would have died from old age. The usual
reason was the need to add a prefix in the adjoining local calling
area, or to expand into another 1000's group on the SxS. Both of these
were enough to justify moving to some form of ESS or remote switching,
from the telco's point of view. Of course, it was interesting to
observe the cutover. Many years worth of accum- ulated troubles which
were dismissed as "customer error" would come pouring out once the new
switch was in place. A common example was an interoffice trunk at the
low-usage end of the group. Such a failure could be reported over and
over for years as "call didn't complete; worked Ok on re-dial", but
the minute the ESS grabbed the trunk it would report a trouble and
mark the trunk as out of service (and transparently re-route the
subscriber's call).

  And then, people want "features" these days - TT dial, last number
redial, call waiting, etc. which weren't economically practical on the
older switch- es. The final nail in the coffin was the Bell breakup
and "Equal Access", which just wasn't going to happen on mechanical
switches.


Terry Kennedy        Operations Manager, Academic Computing
[e-mail]    St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
[e-mail]    [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: Step-by-Step Offices
Date: 23 Jun 1993 03:55:55 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


I'm sure there are still SXS offices. I have heard that in a few areas
of the old Contel area there are a few left. California is one of them
and when the California merger goes through we are set to upgrade
them.  This should prove interesting since most of use have not worked
on one in ten years. I guess you never forget but who knows.


Steven H. Lichter    GTECalif COEI

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Step-by-Step Offices
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 05:49:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> William Hammond
<[e-mail]> writes:

> Are there anymore step-by-step offices in the US?  My mother said that
> the last SxS switch in Maine was retired not too long ago.  How sad.

I'm sure that there are still step offices, and that indeed somebody
will write in and identify some of them for us.

Meantime, your post reminds me that Maybell, Colorado lost it's step
service sometime between last August (1992) and this last May (1993).

Maybell is located on US-40, between Salt Lake City, UT, and Denver,
CO.  Specifically, it's 57 miles east of the Utah-Colorado state line,
in Moffat County.  The Placename Server at University of Michigan does
not list a population figure for it, but I can tell you it's small.

Last summer, I passed by there on my cross country motorcycle trip,
and noted the telephone service.  It was provided by US-West, and was
definitely step.

Here were some highlights:

    - US West standard armored pay phones

    - rotary dials

    - Special dialing instructions that told the customer that the
      phone was pre-pay, and that a dime was required to get a dial
      tone.  Local calls were also ten cents.

    - Five digit local dialing permitted.

    - Sounds: Dial tone that rose in pitch as a mechanical tone generator
      spun up to speed.  Busy signal that was high pitched and
      harsh. Ring signal that I believe was the actual sound of the
      20 cycle AC used to ring the distant end. The click of the
      switchtrain as each digit was dialed.

    - No equal access

This spring, I passed the same way again, and stopped at the same
roadside general store, hoping to call a US-West buddy of mine and
remind him of this bastion of antiquity.

No luck!  Touchtone pay phones, normal call progression tones,
dial-tone first, and 25 cent local calls. :-( Another CO falls.

Pat's comment about the Wabash Cannonball is necessarily correct, for
Wabash, and I'm sure that the good citizens of Maybell will be happy
with custom calling, caller-id, equal access, touchtone and the like,
but for those of us who want to reach out and touch the old days, we
won't find them again, along US-40 in Colorado.  It may be progress,
but that day, I was sad.


Ed Greenberg [e-mail]  Ham Radio: KM6CG

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 23 Jun 93 09:17:05 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Privacy


> [Moderator's Note: There is also the 900 service where the guy patches
> your call out to wherever you want to call with no ID given. He is an
> attorney in California, but I forget the 900 number you call to use
> his service (if you think it is worthwhile). He claims he is not res-
> ponsible for mischievious or illegal uses made of his line (he gets a
> lot of people who like to play games on the phone with victims they
> call), but he has been sued a couple times and always has to pay off.
> I guess he figures he still comes out ahead, with 900 rates being as
> outlandish as they are most of the time.   PAT]

I don't understand why he'd have to pay out? It seems like he's
offering the same service that the phone company does, only on a
per-call basis. I mean, you could probably just find a LD provider
that doesn't pass SS7 info and do the same thing for free. What am I
missing?


Justin Leavens : Microcomputer Specialist : University of Southern California
    [e-mail]    My opinion is that my opinions are my opinions


[Moderator's Note: What you are missing is that unlike telco, he does
not want to be a common carrier (and thus be required to keep records
of his traffic.) Common carriers are never responsible for anything
their customers do, simply because it is assumed they could not have
known about the customer's activities. But this guy says he keeps no
records of any incoming/outgoing calls. Either you are a common
carrier or you are a subscriber. If you are a subscriber, you are
responsible for the uses made of your instruments. If you are a common
carrier you are not responsible, but on the other hand when 'the
authorities' ask you who did do something, you can backtrack on an
audit trail. This guy wants it both ways. Victims of prank calls, etc
have had telco trace calls which went back to him; he says he is not
responsible; the victim asks who *is* responsible; he says he doesn't
know; the victim says therefore you are responsible, and sues. It
would be very nice if all one had to do when accused of a criminal act
or a fraud was to throw one's hands in the air and say, "well I just
don't know who did this"; but the answer to that is baloney!  Your
lines were used, therefore it is your problem. That's the way the
tariff reads.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Conrad Kimball)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Privacy
Date: 23 Jun 93 18:07:09 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services, Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

>> Lately I have been seeing quite a few postings that debate people's
>> "rights" such as privacy. To me these have a fundamental flaw in that
>> they assume "rights" that do not exist.

In the much-debated Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court found that
there _was_ an implied right to privacy in the U.S. Constiution.  I
don't have the exact wording, but it was to the effect that without
privacy most of the other enumerated rights are largely meaningless.

>> When someone walks up to my door, unless it is a sworn office of the
>> law I am under no compulsion to open the door. How I make that
>> decision is purely up to me. If I wish to invest in a peephole or
>> television camera, that is also up to me.

>> Caller-ID is much the same and concerns my decision whether to answer
>> the phone. A person coming up to my door has the right to wear a black
>> hood over their head. I have the right not to answer. Neither of us
>> has the right to force the other's decision.

Agreed.  That's why per-line blocking is necessary, so as to not force
my decision.  And if the telco offers so-called "block blocking",
that's fine with me, too -- we can negotiate the terms under which we
will communicate.

>> A postmark on a letter tells much about where it came from and a
>> registered letter must be signed for. The only right we have is to
>> decide where to mail the letter from and whether to sign the receipt,
>> we cannot tell the post office to use a different postmark or to
>> deliver the letter without a receipt.

A postmark tells you _vastly_ less than caller-ID does, so much less
that the comparison verges on being ludicrous.  For one thing, you
can't use a postmark to index into a reverse directory to get the
sender's name, address, and from that their SSN, and from that
practically anything you want to know (which is another problem in and
of itself).

>> Caller-ID is a fact just as ANI is a fact. The information exists.
>> What seems to be occupying people is whether it *should* exist which
>> is not a choice.

No, the issue is not whether the information _should_ exist, but
whether there should be controls on the use of the information.  Some
of the Scandanavian societies are much more advanced in their privacy
thinking, with legislated limits on how collected personal information
(which to my mind includes my telephone number) can be used.  It
really does boil down to control -- I want maximal control over
information about me.



Conrad Kimball        | Client Server Tech Services, Boeing Computer Services
[e-mail] | P.O. Box 24346, MS 7A-35
[phone]        | Seattle, WA  98124-0346

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Privacy
Date: 23 Jun 1993 19:14:33 GMT
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:

>> I've seen this analogy used twice as an argument for one's inalienable
>> right to obtain a caller's number.  When someone walks up to your
>> door, you do not get information which allows you to visit their home.

>> Inverting the above analogy, caller ID should deliver exactly that:
>> some form of unique ID which enables one to make an authentication/
>> authorization decision.  It should *not* return information allowing
>> "reverse access".

A perfect argument for name only Caller-ID!


Darrell


[Moderator's Note: As always when the topic is the ethics of Caller-ID,
most of us here soon get tired of reading the thread. In the past few
days I hope everything on both sides of the issue has once again been
aired, because we need to kill the thread and go on to other things.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 18:06:26 GMT


> told him the people were on vacation.  He responded that he thought a
> cordless telephone in which the batteries were dying had automatically
> dialed 911!  I have never heard of this feature before.  Has anyone
> [Moderator's Note: We've discussed this here before. I forget what the
> group consensus was regards the technical problem here. Anyone?   PAT]

      I looked into this at one time (it briefly became a "hacker
related issue" in the Neidorf case) and never got any really hard data
on the subject.  There are press reports, but I never saw a make of
phone identified, other than vague references to non-FCC approved
cheap wired (non-cordless) phones.

      I could see this happening if someone built a phone using a chip
with a pin for a 911 button (this appeared as a feature on some phones
in the mid-1980s) but didn't attach the pin to anything.  If you leave
a CMOS input, with its near-infinite input impedance, unconnected, it
floats around, sometimes high, sometimes low, depending on the ambient
electrical field and humidity.  So something like that might trigger
randomly.  That's conjecture, though, and I don't see how that could
get the instrument to go off-hook.


John Nagle

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Timothy Hu)
Subject: Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911?
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Boulder CO
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 20:41:34 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(James P Gonzales) writes:

> [e-mail] (John Holman) writes:

>> told him the people were on vacation.  He responded that he thought a
>> cordless telephone in which the batteries were dying had automatically
>> dialed 911!  I have never heard of this feature before.  Has anyone

>> [Moderator's Note: We've discussed this here before. I forget what the
>> group consensus was regards the technical problem here. Anyone?   PAT]

> I wasn't around to follow that thread, but the same thing has happened
> to me as well; it seems that the phone's battery goes weak, and it
> starts to dial random memory set phone numbers. I assume that your

etc.etc.etc.

A similar thing happened to me at a company I used to help run. We had
an AT&T Merlin phone system that had a marginal power supply. The
phone system would freak out throughout the day, some days it would
work just fine. When it went on the fritz, the extensions would
randomly ring and sometimes it would ring continuously ... not a "ring
 ... ring ... ring ..." but like this: "rrrrrriiiiiiinnnnnnnggggg".
One great big long ring with no silence.

Well, I had been working late one nite when the phones were not acting
up. My boss (who owned the company) knew that I'd be working late. I
was the only one in the building when he left around 9pm. I went home
around 1am (!). It turns out that the phones freaked out around 2 am.

My boss gets a phone call (at home) from the police at about that
time.  The cops told him that someone in the building was trying to
call 911 and must be incapacitated in some way because no one said
anything on the phone to the 911 operators. Well, they kept getting
911 calls from this place, so they figured that someone must be
severely injured on the inside who kept dialing for help. My boss
shows up expecting to find me laying on the floor or something and
found the phones were freaking out and by chance was dialing 911. We
did not have 911 in any speed dialing feature. Turns out that the
power supply's voltage dropped enough that the phone system kept going
in and out of reset, thus picking up and dropping the lines to the CO.
We called AT&T and explained the situation and they said that the
chances of that happening was something like five million to one but
was nonetheless possible.

This was when we found out that the phone system's power supply was
faulty and replaced it. The problem went away.


Cheers,

Timothy Hu [e-mail]     | The intelligence (or lack of) expressed
Interactive Systems Corporation  | above does not necessarily reflect
Resource Solutions International | that of anyone else.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1993 17:21:00
Subject: Re: Leach Zmodem


> My guess is that Leech Zmodem used the original Zmodem sources
> (which are public domain) to change the end of file behavior to accept
> the PR file but NAK its receipt.  If you want to test the behavior,
> you would PR need to find some underground or pirate BBS, or write it
> yourself; I PR doubt that legitimate ones would handle this sort of
> thing.

        I am aware of a file that loads as a TSR that is supposed to
alter the function of DSZ so to make it Leech; and supposedly there is
a hacked version of DSZ that did the same ... but this was way back
around '89 or so.  Since DSZ contains propreitary code (although
reverse enginnering confirmed my guesses about what Chuck's
performance enhancements were) no source code is availible for it, so
I suspect either it was hacked at the binary level or diassembled and
reassembled.

        Anyway, since public domain code for many version of zmodem
are availible, it probably would be very easy to write such a thing,
although it would be of limited use.  Tell the would-be leecher that
he should try finding creative files to upload, like archives of
obscure mailing lists, .GIF files of himself, core dumps, and the
like.  If he doesn't like wasting transfer time, he should get bimodem ;-)


Origin: NETIS [phone]/432-0922 (HST/V32) (1:132/189)

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Koos van den Hout)
Subject: Re: Leach Zmodem
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1993 01:27:00 GMT
Organization: HIN / BBS Koos z'n Doos


[e-mail] writes:

> Can anyone tell me where to find Leach Zmodem?

For starters: I hope you DON'T find it.

An explanation to the rest of the TELECOM Digest: Leach Zmodem is a
special Zmodem implementation which will always abort a file transfer
on the last block recieved. So as soon as the file has been
transferred completely, the sending host will be notified that the
transfer is to be aborted.  Most host packages (BBS'es) see this as
'transfer has not found place' and will therefore not record the
file transfer.

One BBS package I know of (Maximus v2.01wb) has a 'fraud detection'
routine build in that will detect aborts on last block and still log
the transfer as succesfull, and log the fact that probably Leach
Zmodem was used.


Grtx.

Koos van den Hout ----------------------------------------------- Sysop
Student Computer Science (AKA HIO)<This> BBS Koos z'n Doos ([phone])
Inter-: [e-mail] <Spaceforrent!> 300..14400 MNP2-5,10,V42bis)
net   : [e-mail]    | PGP key by finger  | Fido: Sysop @ 2:500/101.11012
Schurftnet : KILL !!!  |  [e-mail]   |     Give us a call !!

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #418
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01395;
          25 Jun 93 3:35 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30111
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 01:06:04 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18036
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 01:05:28 -0500
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 01:05:28 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #420

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 25 Jun 93 01:05:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 420

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Vertical Services Codes List (Updated) (David Leibold)
    Dial Out Service (Paul Robinson)
    Block-Blocking in NETelco (Bob Clements)
    Bellcore User System Language (Neil S. Kenig)
    Touch-One Long Distance Service (The "Hard" sell) (Lenny Tropiano)
    Is AT&T No Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call? (Michael Rosen)
    Caribbean Chat Line Roundup (John R. Levine)
    ISDN Services in LA LATA 5? (Chris Ambler)
    How Much Code in Switch Software? (Tom Streeter)
    International Toll-Free Standard Code? (David Leibold)
    Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology (Jerry Leichter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Vertical Services Codes List (Updated)
From: woody <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 23:18:58 -0400
Reply-to: [e-mail]


The following *xx codes are used in North America for special
telephone features which may be known by such names as CLASS or CMS
(Call Management System). The codes themselves are referred to as
Vertical Services Codes (at least mentioned in the Bellcore document
on the future of the North American Numbering Plan). Cellular services
often use *xx codes for use in promotional services such as free
access to radio stations or highway assistance lines (such as *1010
for CFRB Radio Toronto, AM 1010).

Codes for such services in other nations are not included here, but
may be added to future lists or collected separately. Another matter
not answered here is that of whether there are such things as
Europe-wide or other multi-national codes standards.

Digest readers are welcome to mention any changes or additions to this
list.  E-Mail to [e-mail] or wherever else David Leibold
happens to be on the Internet at any given time. Don't send in any
specific cellular promotional codes, but any codes for special
cellular services like roam or forward which seem to be in widespread
use will be considered.


Service                     Tone    Pulse/rotary   Notes
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assistance/Police           *12         n/a        [1]
Cancel forwarding           *30         n/a        [C1]
Automatic Forwarding        *31         n/a        [C1]
Notify                      *32         n/a        [C1] [2]
Intercom Ring 1 (..)        *51         1151       [3]
Intercom Ring 2 (.._)       *52         1152       [3]
Intercom Ring 3 (._.)       *53         1153       [3]
Extension Hold              *54         1154       [3]
Call Trace                  *57         1157
Selective Call Rejection    *60         1160       (or Call Screen)
Selective Distinct Alert    *61         1161
Selective Call Acceptance   *62         1162
Selective Call Forwarding   *63         1163
ICLID Activation            *65         1165
Call Return (outgoing)      *66         1166
Number Display Blocking     *67         1167       [4]
Computer Access Restriction *68         1168
Call Return (incoming)      *69         1169
Call Waiting disable        *70         1170       [4]
No Answer Call Transfer     *71         1171
Usage Sensitive 3 way call  *71         1171
Call Forwarding: start      *72 or 72#  1172
Call Forwarding: cancel     *73 or 73#  1173
Speed Calling (8 numbers)   *74 or 74#  1174
Speed Calling (30 numbers)  *75 or 75#  1175
Anonymous Call Rejection    *77         1177       [5]
Call Screen Disable         *80         1160       (or Call Screen) [M: *50]
Selective Distinct Disable  *81         1161       [M: *51]
Select. Acceptance Disable  *82         1162
Select. Forwarding Disable  *83         1163       [M: *53]
ICLID Disable               *85         1165
Call Return (cancel out)    *86         1186       [6] [M: *56]
Anon. Call Reject (cancel)  *87         1187       [5]
Call Return (cancel in)     *89         1189       [6] [M: *59]


Notes:

[C1]     - Means code used for Cellular One service
[1]      - for cellular in Pittsburgh, PA A/C 412 in some areas
[2]      - indicates that you are not local and maybe how to reach you
[3]      - found in Pac Bell territory; Intercom ring causes a distinctive
           ring to be generated on the current line; Hold keeps a call
           connected until another extension is picked up
[4]      - applied once before each call
[5]      - A.C.R. blocks calls from those who blocked Caller ID
           (used in C&P territory, for instance)
[6]      - cancels further return attempts
[M: *xx] - alternate code used for MLVP (multi-line variety package)
           by Bellcore. It goes by different names in different RBOCs.
           In Bellsouth it is called Prestige. It is an arrangement of
           ESSEX like features for single or small multiple line groups.

           The reason for different codes for some features in MLVP is that
           call-pickup is *8 in MLVP so all *8x codes are reaasigned *5x

Other Notes:

The lack of *2x, *3x and *4x as standard codes suggests that this is
due to compatibility with the 11xx equivalent. 112 was once used as
long distance access. 113 and 114 may still be used in a few areas for
directory assistance and repair respectively.

Thanks to contributors:

David A. Cantor ([e-mail])
Bob Frankston ([e-mail])
John Gilbert ([e-mail]) - posted a similar list last year
Mike King ([e-mail])
Leslie R Reeves (lesreeves (@attmail.com?)) - had Bellcore-supported codes
Steven Schwartz ([e-mail])
Bruce Taylor ([e-mail])

Some additional information came from Bell Canada and Pacific Bell.

----------------

David Leibold   [e-mail]   [e-mail]
(internex.io.org not guaranteed for full operation just yet)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 13:48:07 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Dial Out Service
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> [Moderator's Note: What you are missing is that unlike telco, he
> does not want to be a common carrier (and thus be required to
> keep records of his traffic.)

That brings up an interesting point; while I don't go into reading all
of the volumes of tariff schedules filed when I go looking for the
tariff schedules, and I don't always know all of the regulations I'm
trying to remember hearing anything about where someone couldn't start
a common carrier without having a tariff provision to keep records on
customer activity.

In theory, that guy with the 900 dial-out service could file a
two-page tariff schedule and become a common carrier and thus evade
liability.  Generally, telephone companies keep records of calls for
accounting and billing purposes, e.g. since some people have metered
service, it is necessary to keep logs of calls made, and since it's
less trouble to collect information on everyone than to create
metering bits, this is one of the reasons for metering because the
company has to create bills.  But since this guy is having the service
supplier do the billing for him, and otherwise does not set additional
charges for service, I'm not sure where there is a provision for
requiring a common carrier to keep usage logs.

Now there is a set of FCC regulations requiring certain common
carriers to use certain accounting procedures, but they don't apply to
common carriers with very few customers.  Since this particular
'common carrier' only has one customer (the supplier who sends bills
for connections), in theory that wouldn't apply either, I suspect.

This does create an interesting question.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: But he cannot avoid record-keeping if for no other
reason than he has to pay tax on his income; the money paid to him by
his customers, the users of his service. Whoever provides his 900
lines gives him that information. So okay, Mr. Common Carrier, who
called you last Tuesday at 1:59 AM? What does the print out which came
with your check from the 900 provider say?  They put the inbound call
on your line 'x' and you process the outbound call on your line 'y'.
He has to pay the bill for his outgoing calls to telco. Where does the
telco bill say you called last Tuesday at 1:59 AM via your line 'y'?
I think if he attempted to obtain common carrier status *merely as a
way to circumvent responsibility*, and refused to keep records for the
same reason, the court would see through this thinly veiled BS.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 14:09:00 EDT
From: Bob Clements <[e-mail]>
Subject: Block-Blocking in NETelco


A while ago I posted a note on New England Tel's starting to implement
CLASS features in the Boston metro area.  I made a comment that the
list of features seemed kind of small, e.g., no call-block lists and
no block-blocking.

I've figured out why there's no block-blocking yet.

It seems they are implementing CLASS on a suburb-by-suburb basis.  For
calls within the metro area that do have CLASS features, you get the
number or a "blocked" indication.  (Except for PBXes which show up as
"out of area".  I dunno about cell phones.)

For calls to a CLASS-equipped CO from a non-CLASS-equipped CO, _ALL_
calls show as "blocked" rather than out-of-area.  My guess is that
these exchanges are SS7 connected, even if no CLASS software is
loaded, and therefore the software won't show them as "out of area".
Since they don't want to get people mad by showing their numbers
before their offices allow them to block with *67, they are showing
entire exchanges as "blocked".

So naturally you can't use block-blocking, since 3/4 of the phones in
Boston would be blocked and could not be unblocked even if the caller
wanted to do so.

Similarly, you can't use the fact that a call shows "blocked" to just
ignore the call.

Maybe it'll make sense in a year or so when they get every CO
converted.  And maybe they'll offer the rest of the features then,
though I wouldn't bet on it.

[I decided not to post in detail on the various glitches as they got
the system started.  Strange things like the clock being 12 hours off
on reported times, *67 giving three different results depending on
what service you had, even though it was supposed to be free for
everyone, etc ... it's mostly better now.]


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Neil S Kenig)
Subject: Bellcore User System Language
Organization: TeleSciences CO Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 19:04:19 GMT


Does anyone know of a lex/yacc grammar or other publicly available
implementation of a parser for Bellcore's User System Language (USL)
part of their Operations Technology Generic Requirements (OTGR): User
System Interface as specified in their TR-TSY-000825?


Thanks.

Neil Kenig                |  TeleSciences CO Systems
                          |  351 New Albany Road
[e-mail]   |  Moorestown, NJ 08057
                          |  [phone] ext. 228

------------------------------

Subject: Touch-One Long Distance Service (The "Hard" Sell)
Organization: ICUS Software Systems, Austin, Texas
Date: 24 Jun 93 11:28:59 CDT (Thu)
From: [e-mail] (Lenny Tropiano)


Last night while watching TV, I received a phone call from someone who
introduced themselves as an affiliate of SWBT and their long distance
carriers.  He went on to explain a new service that SWBT (Southwestern
Bell Telephone) was carrying called Touch-One.  He made it sound like
another feature I could add to my phone line.

He went on to explain that after analyzing my telephone long distance
charges (w/AT&T, in fact I've been a customer of AT&T ever since I've
had telephone service) I would benefit from this new service.  He said
that Touch-One monitors the cost "per minute" of long distance for
both intra-state and inter-state and will give you the lowest possible
cost per minute (based on AT&T, MCI, and Sprint's rates) at that
current time.

I told him that I've been a customer with AT&T and that I've been
happy with the service and don't want to change it now.  He said, 'you
realize that AT&T isn't the cheapest every hour of the day, [and he
went to reiterate the above cost-per-minute deal] ...'  I told him I
had two services, "Any Hour Savings Plan" and "Reach Out Texas" that
AT&T offered to keep my telephone costs down.  He said without
spending $10.70 a month, you'll automatically get the lowest rates.
He said just confirm you'd be interested in the service, and you'll
get the literature detailing it in seven to ten days.  I said, "I'd
rather see what this entails before I sign up, do I have to change
long distance carriers?  Drop services from AT&T?  [still confused at
that time on what this really is?!]"

Rambling on, he said that you'd automatically be dropped from the AT&T
services, nothing would have to be done on your part.  You can stay on
this service one day, one week, one month, etc ... and see how you
like it without any cost to you?  In fact, he said, within a week or
so AT&T will probably call you back offering you $50-75 to come back
to them.  [Now the lightbulb clicked on!]  No thanks, I said.  He
replied, well let me FAX you some information on the service, no
obligation to you.  I told him my fax number, and till this time this
morning I still haven't gotten anything.

I called SWBT and they said they are a billing agent for Touch-One
long distance company.

Happy with AT&T, I'm staying there.


Lenny Tropiano           ICUS Software Systems        [e-mail]
              ...!{cs.utexas.edu,ames,pacbell}!icus!lenny
 ------------- 6905-B Argonne Forest Cove, Austin, TX 78759 --------------

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 04:58:37 GMT


I was recently listening to my favorite radio show, The Don & Mike
Show (currently syndicated on WJFK 106.7 FM in DC, 1300 AM in
Baltimore, 1520 AM in Buffalo, NY and 1010 AM in Tampa Bay, FL -- soon
to be in Chicago), and heard Don receive a collect call from his son.

The call went like this:

"AT&T with a collect call from, state your name please."

And then his son stated his name.  Have they eliminated the practice
of asking for the caller's name straight off and relaying it to the
called party?


Mike


[Moderator's Note: There have been no changes. All that happened was
the operator screwed up -- forgot to ask it at first -- and had to get
it after the fact. It happens.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Caribbean Chat Line Roundup
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 13:35:16 EDT


I fished one of those magazines that features pictures of undressed
women out of the trash the other day and found that they now have a
"safe sex" advertisement section with little display (and I do mean
display) ads for phone sex services.  Most of the numbers are 800 or
900, and a few US are POTS numbers.  Most of the non-800 numbers say
you need a credit card, but some of them say no credit card needed, so
presumably they do a real or fake collect callback.

There are also more Caribbean numbers than before.  Here are a few,
along with the countries where they putatively terminate:

Guyana:
011 592 279 900  (Says it works from Canada, too.)

Suriname:
011 597 423-042, -034, -038, -022, -240, -030, -014, -007.  (Various
names, of which the only printable one is "sex wanted.")  It says
to dial 10222 first.  I though MCI was out of the phone sex biz.  Hmmn.

Netherlands Antilles:

011 599 2888 ("International Party Line".)
All normal N.A. phone numbers start with 3, 5, 7, or 9.

As has been noted before, these are probably all physically located in
the relatively developed Netherlands Antilles, since Guyana and
Suriname are physically nearby and are both extremely impoverished and
have terrible phone systems.

Also, a lot of the ads for 800 numbers say you can bill your call to
MC/V or Connectcard.  What's a Connectcard?


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl


[Moderator's Note: Two answers for you: MCI is 'out of the phone sex
biz' to the extent they will not bill for 900 calls to sex or chat
lines. They'll provide the carriage -- give you all the 900 lines you
want and the calling number -- you pay MCI for the carriage and bill
the callers on your own. I guess you would send the tape to a service
bureau for rebilling via local telco or whatever, but MCI won't do it
for you any longer.

For next: 'Connect Card' is a syndicate of phone-sex operators who
issue their own (very) limited-purpose credit card to accomodate
customers of any member of the syndicate. I think there are a dozen or
so phone-sex services, both gay and straight who accept the Connect
Card.  Many of those may in fact be owned by the same company. The
costs of maintaining a business office, extending credit, colletion,
equipment maintainence, phone bill reconciliation, etc are pro-rated
among the members of the syndicate. Connect Card even charges interest
on unpaid balances each month.  :)   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Chris Ambler -- Phish)
Subject: ISDN Services in LA Lata 5?
Organization: The Phishtank
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 19:43:32 GMT


A relative of mine just got the trial ISDN system that Pac*Bell is
testing in the LA (California) area. He asked me to ask you all if
anyone knows of any direct-dial ISDN digital services (BBSs, info
services, etc) in LATA 5? Email please, I'll summarize if there's
interest (and if there's anything out there :-))

Thanks in advance!


[e-mail] | Christopher J. Ambler
[e-mail]  | Author, FSUUCP 1.32

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tom Streeter)
Subject: How Much Code in Switch Software?
Date: 24 Jun 1993 19:57:38 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville


There's a thread going on in alt.technology.misc that refuses to die,
and I was hoping someone here might have the information that will be
able to kill it.  At least as much as any fact can stop a thread,
anyway.

It's really a silly question of no real import, so in typical UseNet
fashion it becomes the Most Important Question Ever that must be
answered before any other discussions can take place.  Sort of like
telemarketer discussions, only more inane.

So, with no further ado: Roughly how many lines of code does the
software that controls digital switches like the 5ESS (to name but
one) use?  I know there are probably a number of variables to
consider, but I'm looking for ballpark here.  More than a million?
More than two million?

For those of you with time on your hands, here's the story as I've
followed it: Somebody saw 'Jurrasic Park' and made a comment about the
the scene where someone is considering looking for a bug in the code
of the program controlling the park.  I believe one character mentions
four million lines of code, but I could be wrong.  Anyway, the person
who brought this up said that he thought this was a lot of code and
expressed the opinion that no one could write that much.  A few
responses ping-ponged around, then somebody mentioned that phone
switches might have this much code.  This drew a response saying that
there was no way this could be true, which drew a response that was
the epistemological equivalent of "oh yeah?", which drew a "yeah, so
you're a f*cking idiot," which ... well, you get the idea.

So would someone who knows be kind enough to e-mail me an estimate
with something to explain how it is you know it?  My plan is to repost
a file of my responses to alt.technology.misc, so please let me know
if you would rather your response not be included verbatim.

Thanks in advance, and be nice to PAT -- e-mail me instead of replying
back to the Digest.


Tom Streeter                                |   [e-mail]
Dept. of Mass Communication                 |   704-251-6227
University of North Carolina at Asheville   |   Opinions expressed here are
Asheville, NC 28804                         |   mine alone.

------------------------------

Subject: International toll-free standard code?
From: woody <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 23:25:15 -0400


I read a reference once to Mercury being assigned the STD code 0500
for its toll-free service in the UK (competing with BTs 0800 code).
However, there was concern that this violated "international
standards".  What international standards apply to domestic toll-free
services, and where is this established (if not an unspoken or
informal standard) that 800 should be used for domestic service? (Note
that many countries use something other than an "800" at this time,
though some are changing to that.)


David Leibold    [e-mail]   [e-mail]  etc etc

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 10:13:10 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology


That the mouthpiece is disconnected IS an accident of technology.  If
ringing current reached a carbon mike, it would damage it; same for
traditional earpieces, in fact.  As a result it was important to keep
these items off the line when ring current might be present.  (They
would also disturb the impedance-based mechanism for sensing when the
phone goes off-hook.)  The combination of the design of the system and
the available technology made it necessary to include complex
multi-contact switches in telephones to make sure that the appropriate
connections were made and broken at the right times.

No such constraints exist today.  Certainly, an ISDN phone could
easily be set up to forward voice from the mouthpiece no matter what
the "switchhook" state is -- that's probably just a bit in the
software.  Building this into traditional analogue phones would be
harder, but no big deal -- though why anyone should bother, except for
bugging, I don't know.

The fact that the technological accident of that leaves the mouthpiece
dead hasn't changed over the years is neither here nor there; it was
no more a conscious decision than the original "caller ID" by
operator, replaced by NO "caller ID" from a switch.


Jerry

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #420
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04682;
          25 Jun 93 7:00 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12299
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 03:32:49 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13028
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 03:32:02 -0500
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 03:32:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #421

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 25 Jun 93 03:32:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 421

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Sir?  SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI! (David W. Tamkin)
    Re: Sir?  SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI! (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (David Breneman)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (Bradley J. Bittorf)
    Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG) (Jim Rees)
    Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG) (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Are You a Prodigy Deadbeat? (Jack Pines)
    Re: Are You a Prodigy Deadbeat? (Bryan D. Boyle)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Gary W. Sanders)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Mark Fraser)
    Re: Caller-ID and Privacy (Don Wegeng)
    Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland (Haakon Styri)
    Re: *6n Codes (Actually, Vertical Services Codes) (David A. Cantor)
    Re: NYNEX ISDN Hot Line (William H. Sohl)
    Re: Costing Home Fiber Installation: Looking For Advice (Peter J. Scott)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 11:50 CDT
From: [e-mail] (David W. Tamkin)
Subject: Re: Sir?  SIR??  How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI!
Organization: Contributor Account at MCS, Chicago, Illinois  60657


Toby Nixon wrote in <[e-mail]> in comp.dcom.
telecom:

> Has anyone else noticed in the new radio commercial "introducing"
> 1-800-COLLECT, that the operator answers the phone with this line:

> "1-800-COLLECT.  What number would you like to call collect, sir?"

> No pause, no listening to the caller first, just call them sir.  How
> do THEY know its a "sir" calling?

Maybe MCI assumes that women have too much intelligence and self-
respect to be taken in by its advertising?


David W. Tamkin   Box 59297   Northtown Station, Illinois  60659-0297
[e-mail]   CompuServe: 73720,1570   MCI Mail: 426-1818

------------------------------

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sir?  SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI!
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 14:26:00 PDT


Hear, hear!

I'm not exactly what you'd call a feminist, but it does get a bit
tiresome when you're frequently addressed as "MR.  Lynne Gregg" in
most of your junk mail (even the occasional non-junk).

Now, I'm not exactly a soprano either, but what's worse is when you DO
get the operator, telemarketer, etc. on the line and they STILL call
you "Sir" (when you're clearly NOT).

One of my better ones (wasn't too humorous at the time) was trying to
check in at a hotel at midnight where my guaranteed res. was no where
to be found and hotel over-booked.  The manager finally found me as
MR. GREGG LYNNE.

Oh well, I'm sure no offense was intended in any of these cases.

Toby, you probably have your own share of amusing anecdotes.


Regards,

Lynne

BTW, I didn't think that 1-800-COLLECT was an MCI company...

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Date: 24 Jun 93 19:41:55 GMT
Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA


[e-mail] wrote:

> Does anyone know if there are still such things as ten-party lines
> still in service?  I came from a small town in Missouri and our family
> had a ten-party line until about ten years ago.  I went on a tour of
> the CO once, and as it was explained to me, the phones on a ten-party
> line used an extra ground wire to the instrument. Five of the phones
> rang on different frequencies on one side of the line and five on the
> other.  The switch was a Stromberg-Carlson installed in 1960.  At the
> exchange, they decided which phone rang by attaching the connection to
> a block with the correct frequency for the number.

> Also, another small exchange next to us had a unique system, where the
> switch rang all the phones on the party line, but with a different
> combination of rings (1 short-2 long, etc.).  I learned about this
> from a high school teacher who was awakened many times in the middle
> of the night.

When I was growing up (1960's) my parents were on a 16-party line,
also with Stromberg Carlson equipment (Island Empire Telephone
Company).  All the houses were wired with two wires, not three.  It
was a combination of multiple bell frequencies and multiple ringing
patterns.  It was kind of convenient, because my grandparents next
door had the same bell frequency as my parents.  We were two short
rings and they were one long one.  That way we could pick up each
others' phones when somebody wasn't home.  My parents finally got a
private line in the late '70s, after some guy moved into the
neighborhood who would take his phone off the hook at night -- you'd
pick it up and just hear snoring.  The phone company agreed to waive
the $1 per mile surcharge (from the central office) because of our
numerous complaints about unavailable service, and just charge my
parents the straight monthly private line fee.  We finally got
electonic switching equipment about five years ago.  Until that time,
it was all step switches and no touch tone.  Telco insiders called
206-858 the "dinosaur exchange".


David Breneman    Email: [e-mail]
System Administrator,  Software Engineering Services
Digital Systems International, Inc.   Voice: 206 881-7544  Fax: [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bradley J. Bittorf)
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines
Organization: Allen-Bradley Company, Inc.
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 17:13:29 GMT


All this talk about party lines reminds me of a local legend where I
grew up, in rural northern Wisconsin in GTE country (Langlade county).

Rumor had it that when Bart Starr (Super Bowl I & II Most Valuable
Player for the Green Bay Packers) built his summer home on a lake near
us, even he had to accept a party line.  There was a several-year wait
for private lines -- I think my parents got one after about five years.

Maybe Bart got his after one or two ;-)


Bradley J. Bittorf  Allen-Bradley Co.
[phone]     [e-mail] or bjb!odin!uunet

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG)
Date: 24 Jun 1993 22:51:19 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Andy Sherman) writes:

> To the best of my knowledge, the AT command set itself is not part of
> this patent, but, of course, it is not real useful without a mode
> switching technique.

True, but there are ways to switch modes without infringing the
patent.  The rs232 spec is full of signals that can often be used for
this purpose (dtr, break, etc).

Amusingly enough, some manufacturers get around the patent by
dispensing with the delay before the "+++."  (If your line just went
dead while you were reading this paragraph, you have such a modem.)

It seems to me that if the ppp folks really wanted to produce a useful
spec, they would have included the ability to escape '+' in their
async map.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 07:34:24 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


> I have a copy of the patent somewhere, but I do remember that the
> specific claim of patentability is the use of a time delimited
> "escape" sequence to transition from data to command mode.  That means
> the <guard time><pattern><guard time> is what is patented. Also note
> that the guard time is on both sides of the pattern. There may have

Also not a lawyer but if true this would indicate that the sequence
<guard time><pattern> without the second guard time would *not* be
covered by the patent and IMHO would probably be sufficient to avoid
false triggering. Interesting.


Warmly,

Padgett

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (jack pines)
Subject: Re: Are You a Prodigy Deadbeat?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 17:04:09 GMT


I am a Prodigy Deadbeat.  I originally had a 24 month subscription
that cost about $8 a month.  When I had five months left on the
subscription they sent me an electronic notice which amounted to a
near 100% price increase and said that if I did not voluntarily give
up my remaining five months at $8 they would automatically renew and
start billing me the new rate.  I replied that that I was not
interested in continuing the subscription and in no way were they
authorized to extend it for me.

Several weeks before my subscription would lapse, I removed the
Prodigy software from all computers that I have access to.  About ten
days after the subscription lapsed, I got a bill for the first month
at the new rate.  I immediately returned it saying that they had not
been authorized to extend the subscription.  A month later I got a
notice that my subscription had been cancelled but that it was after
the renewal and therefore I owed them $1.93!  Every month since then I
have gotten a bill for $1.93 which goes promptly into the circular
file.  It will be interesting to see if a collection agency will be
hungry enough to come after me.  Maybe I should move.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bryan D. Boyle)
Subject: Re: Are You a Prodigy Deadbeat?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bryan D. Boyle)
Organization: Exxon Research & Engineering
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 13:50:03 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
com (Paul Barnett) writes:

Stuff deleted re: Prodigy dinging someone automatically when subscription
voluntarily lapsed ...

> Finally, he wanted to determine why all this happened.  Steve Hein, a
> Prodigy spokesman, explained that they automatically renewed
> memberships.  However, there have so many complaints, that they have
> decided to discontinue it.

> Steve's final comment:  "Maybe they know a lot about computers.  But
> when it comes to business, they're no prodigy."

Apropos the last comment: This is IBM and Sears, right?  Know about
computers?  Know about business?  IBM and SEARS?


Bryan D. Boyle  <><   EMAIL: [e-mail]
#include <disclaimer> Hack first and ask questions later.
908 730-3338          ER & E Co. Rt. 22 East, Annandale, NJ

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 12:32:30 GMT
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> Bob Larribeau <p00136@psilink.
com> writes:

> 4. In the U.S. ISDN is priced competitively with analog services.  The
> issues are deployment, i.e., can you get it where you want it, and
> marketing.  Deployment will improve greatly this year.  Educating the
> market will take more time, but it is happening.

It depends on where your looking at it from ... ISDN is priced
competitively ONLY if you look at the pricing on a business line rate
standpoint.  ISDN (at least in our area) has no chance in the
residential market with its current price structure. In addition to
the high terminal equipment cost, you also are forced into a minute
line rate. With almost no deployment of ISDN (locally) the only use
the line has is for voice.


Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR)   [e-mail]
AT&T Bell Labs      614-860-5965

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Date: 24 Jun 1993 19:12:06 -0700
Organization: Wimsey


While we're talking ISDN -- what is the status of the D-channel
capability in USA, Canada, Japan and Europe?  I have been led to
believe that Canadian deployment will limit the useful ness of
D-channel because "it threatens the security of the network" and
therefore will not be made available to anyone other than the
(monopoly) common carrier.  This brings up a point of potential
efficiency for Paging service providers, Cellular, PCS, competitive LD
carriers and a host of other application providers who could really
offer some whizbang services with D-channel access over and above the
crippleware exposed to date.  Comments?


Mark Fraser

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Don Wegeng)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Privacy
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Xerox Corp., Henrietta, NY
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 15:37:04 GMT


If Pat will permit one more (brief) message on this topic, I'd like to
point out that your local phone company does not offer CNID out of the
goodness of it's heart, or because it's the morally right thing to do.
CNID is just another way for the phone company to make money, pure and
simple.  The AT&T executive may be correct when he/she talks about
"accidents of technology", but let us not forget that this accident
was "repaired" only so that the phone companies could make more money.
If CNID was required to be a free service, it wouldn't exist.


Don Wegeng    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: And if I can be permitted one more brief Moderator's
Note, you are both right and wrong about the reason for 'repairing'
the accident. More precisely, AT&T did not develop ESS so they could
offer 'custom calling features' like Call Waiting, etc. They developed
ESS because the level of fraud in general had grown so ridiculously
high. Throughout its history, telco banked on customers not knowing
that well (if at all) 'how the system worked'. Trouble is, by the 1960
era, *everyone* knew how it worked, or at least everyone with a bent
to fraud. The late 1960's were the years of much discontent and hatred
in the USA. Dissidents and protestors of every conceivable cause, al-
though Viet Nam was the main reason for the almost constant disruptions
we experienced. AT&T was a *big* target; it functioned like a public
toilet for every radical group in America back then.

By the late 1960's *everyone* knew how the calling card formula was
calculated each year. Every year early in January, all the phreaks
would sit down and compare their *legitimate* calling cards after
first promising not to abuse each other. With several legitimate
calling cards on display, the group would study them. Within five
minutes, a little logic and a process of elimination showed what key
letter went with which digit, etc. *Everyone* knew the operator had
no idea what their number was when they placed a long distance call;
ergo, they told the operator any number they felt like.  An executive
of Illinois Bell was questioned by the Illinois Commerce Commission in
1969 regards a rate increase the company wanted. The Commission asked,
"How much money did you lose to fraud last year?" The IBT guy said
*seven million dollars*. IBT alone. The year 1968 alone.

Since everyone knew how easy it was to defraud AT&T in those days of
stepper switch and crossbar offices, the only way out of the morass
was to build the whole system over again from scratch in a different
way completely.  That's what they did. Revenue from custom calling
features is like icing on the cake, but custom calling and the more
recent CLASS features were not what AT&T had in mind when ESS was
developed. The purpose of ESS was to help Mother regain control of the
public telephone network; a network she losing control of rapidly and
in a disasterous way.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Haakon Styri)
Subject: Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Norwegian Telecom Research
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 12:22:51 GMT


[e-mail] (Georg Schwarz) writes:

> [...]  +1 610 is somewhere in the Carribean, I suspect?

Funny thing, but I wasn't able to find the North American 610 area
code in my tables ... Anyone know for sure? If it's not in use, does
the local network operator run a scam, routing these calls to a local
service. (Unlikely, but still possible. The numbers we're talking
about are usually just connected to an answering machine anyway.  Who
would notice?)  Or, did someone get this wrong from the very
beginning, and we aren't really talking about country code 1 at all?

> I've heard that long distance carriers in those countries
> encourage setting up such numbers and advertising them abroad in order
> to lure overseas calls from countries with high telephone rates (like
> Germany!). They get half of the money (don't they?).

To make a point: What the the orginator of the call is charged by his
local network operator may not have relevance to the amount of money
charged by the network operator (long distance carrier) at the
receiving end. (Some countries may even have regulations, or just an
accepted price system, to the effect that some types of calls will
subsidize other types of calls.)

Thus, it doesn't make sense to talk about "splitting the profit" at a
fixed rate. But I guess the "service" providers do get paid at some
rate according to the traffic they generate at non-peak hours.

Anyway, this kind of traffic does usually make some money for the
local network operator (telephone company, whatever -- please bear
over with my non-merkin vocabulary). However, the risk is entirely on
the local network operator. The customer may be broke, not able to pay
an enourmous phone bill. There may be complaints about suspected
grey-/gold-/whatever-boxing.


Haakon Styri    <[e-mail]>  ***   std. disclaimer applies   ***


[Moderator's Note: The only fraud against 900 numbers I've ever seen
(other than making the call and later claiming you did not, or you
were not happy with it or the call was made by a minor, etc) involves
finding out what actual POTS number the 900 number translates into and
then calling the POTS number direct, bypassing the billing machinery
in the process. For small-time 900 information providers, getting the
traffic brought in on T-1 direct from the IXC may not be affordable or
cost effective. They rely on their 900 provider accepting the call at
the local Point of Presence, then outdialing it to a regular number.
A few years ago when some 900 operators had their hooks into the
carrier's Point of Presence in the Opera Building downtown, someone
noted a whole slew of them were on the 312-601 exchange.

In a phreak pamphlet published about 1987 under the title 'Why Should
You Have to Pay For A Good Time?' a couple dozen or so IP's were
listed with their 900 number, the cost (you were avoiding), and the
POTS translation number. Of course I doubt they paid for the call to
the POTS number either; they probably hacked that as well ... one that
I remember is in Our Nation's (Drug and Crime) Capitol, Washington DC.
The Naval Observatory Talking Clock can be reached at 900-410-TIME or
via POTS at 202-653-1800.  I am reminded of the story about the
prostitute who goes into a bank to get change for a hundred-dollar
bill; the teller examines the money and tells the prostitute it is
counterfeit; the prostitute screams 'my god, I've been raped!' ... can
you imagine some of those IPs screaming when they finished 30, 45 or
60 minute sessions with those phreaks only to later find out the 900
provider had no record of the call because they never saw it?   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 10:20:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: David A. Cantor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: *6n Codes (Actually, Vertical Services Codes)


Re Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 411, Message 13 of 14:

> Call Forwarding: start    *72        1172
> Call Forwarding: cancel   *73        1173
> Speed Calling             *74        1174

Here in Nashua, New Hampshire (in New England Telephone land), these
codes are dialled as 72#, 73#, and 74# (thought the equivalent 117n
codes also work).  Also, 74# is used for Speed Calling-8, but 75# is
used for Speed Calling-30.

I recall using the same codes (nn# variety) when I lived in Lowell,
Mass.


David A. Cantor         [phone]
131 D.W. Highway, #505  Nashua, NH  03060

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: NYNEX ISDN Hot Line
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 16:00:52 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken
Germann) writes:

> Digiboard supports the ISDN connections through the IMAC and PC/IMAC
> product lines. There/our sales department can be reached at
> 612-943-9020 or e-mail to [e-mail].

> The IMAC will do either 128k per second or 256k per second on an ISDN line.
> Ken Germann              Sky Point Communications, Inc.

I'll presume that passing of 256k on an ISDN line implies using a
Primary access line (23B+D) or at least two basic access lines (2B+D)
because the ability to run 256K requires at least 4 B channels (64k
each).

If my presumption is wrong, could you please explain what is being done?


Thanks,

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter J. Scott)
Subject: Re: Costing Home Fiber Installation: Looking For Advice
Date: 24 Jun 1993 17:02:12 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA/Caltech
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Lars Poulsen) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> Peter Scott, NASA/JPL/
> Caltech ([e-mail]) writes:

>> let's say that I'm moving to a house one to five miles outside the
>> nearest (small) town in Northern California, for the sake of immediate
>> argument, not that there won't be many other issues to nail down.
>> Whom should I contact for more information?

> You should contact an INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER also called a
> mid-level network operator or "regional network". There are about 50
> of these; most are only active in a particular geographical area, and
> many serve only "Research and Education".

>> [Moderator's Note: It won't come inexpensively, and unless your expected
>> volume of news and mail is going to be really huge, you will probably
>> wind up with a UUCP-style arrangement, calling on the phone as desired
>> to poll, etc.  Private, dedicated circuits of any kind -- fiber optic
>> or regular lead wires -- are seldom justified economically unless you
>> can keep the line loaded, or in use virtually 24 hours per day. You
>> will also need to pay whoever provisions your Internet connection, in
>> addition to telco or whoever strings the circuit for you. ...  PAT]

I should have mentioned that I have in mind being able to work at
home ... which would require a high-speed connection capable of
carrying X (so at least 56kb) and preferably audio/video (in which
case, fiber).  This is not (just) for private news and mail.

Yeah, the cost could be out of sight, but I'd still like to know what
it is.  Most of it would be tax-deductible.


Peter Scott, NASA/JPL/Caltech   ([e-mail])

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #421
******************************










Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02989;
          27 Jun 93 15:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24765
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 27 Jun 1993 00:53:32 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28586
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 27 Jun 1993 00:53:03 -0500
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 00:53:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #428

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 27 Jun 93 00:53:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 428

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Competition News Tidbits (Bell Canada News via David Leibold)
    Bell Canada Seeks 800 Portability Throughout North America (David Leibold)
    FTP Address for CuD? (Christopher Zguris)
    Refunds For Certain 900 Calls (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Alpha Pager Interface (Steven Warner)
    Re: Cell/Pager Integration (Lynne Gregg)
    How to Tell What Phone Number is When I Can't Dial? (Dave Grabowski)
    Re: Step-by-Step Offices (Terry Kennedy)
    Canadian Video on Demand Tests (David Leibold)
    Re: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles (Alan Boritz)
    Re: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Area Code and Prefix Each Off by One Digit (Carl G. Moore, Jr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Competition News Tidbits
From: woody <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 21:49:44 -0400


[from Bell News, Bell Canada (Ontario) 28 June 1993. The following is
thus a compilation of Bell Canada's, and some items may be older than
others.]

News from the competitive front:

Deregulation is only option.

Industry consultant Frank McInerney thinks complete deregulation is
the only policy option for the rapidly converging cable and
telecommunications industries. "Your customers will decide to
deregulate you with an axe, as has happened with IBM", McInerney told
cable and telephone company representatives at a recent
telecommunications conference sponsored by {The Financial Post}.

AGT competition hearing continues.

The CRTC hearing on the requests by Unitel and Cam-net to interconnect
with AGT is still proceeding. Both companies want to offer long
distance services in Alberta, but AGT was not part of the 1992
hearings on the long distance issue and is not subject to the terms of
Decision 92-12 [CRTC decision opening long distance competition to
most telcos]. Final comments from all parties in the AGT proceeding
began June 25.

AT&T leads international pack.

AT&T is the world's largest carrier of international traffic,
according to a recent report by Lehman Bros., a U.S. consulting firm.
Based on 1991 statistics for minutes of use, the report put AT&T way
out in front of the pack with 6.56 billion minutes of international
calls. Germany's Deutsche Telekom was a distant second with 3.56
billion minutes, followed by France Telecom, British Telecom, Cable
and Wireless, and MCI. Stentor was listed in eighth place with 1.42
billion minutes, which represents calls from Canada to the U.S.
Overseas calls from Canada are carried by Teleglobe which was not
included in the list.

AT&T launches WorldSource.

AT&T recently announced the development of a new global network system
called WorldSource. By developing customized seamless services to suit
the needs of the world's big multi-national corporations, WorldSource
will provide competition for the new international joint-venture
company recently announced by British Telecom and MCI.

AT&T increases long distance rates.

AT&T has announced that it intends to raise some prices and lower
others on certain direct-dialed long distance calls made during the
evening. The new rates, which amount to an additional five cents per
month on the average consumer's long distance bill, will provide AT&T
with a net increase of $46.5 million (U.S.) in annual revenue.

US West buys into Time Warner.

US West, one of the regional Bell operating companies, has agreed to
buy 25 per cent of Time Warner Entertainment for $2.5 billion (US).

Time Warner is the second largest U.S. cable operator and owns the
rights to thousands of Hollywood movies. The two companies plan to
join forces to deliver information and entertainment services directly
to the home.

Visa and Sprint team up.

Visa and Sprint have teamed up to offer U.S. Visa customers a new
service that makes it easier for them to use their Visa cards to make
long distance calls. Customers simply dial 10 VSA to access the
service, then input their home telephone number and a four-digit Visa
code. Customers of the new service benefit from long distance savings
plus convenient dialing and billing.

------------------------------

Subject: Bell Canada Seeks 800 Portability Throughout North America
From: woody <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 21:55:11 -0400


[from Bell News, Bell Canada (Ontario) 28 June 1993; content is
Bell's]

Bell favors North American 800 number portability.

Bell announced that it intends to push for full North American 800
number portability.

Bell and its Stentor partner companies plan to implement this service
on January 16, 1994.

Portability has been available in the U.S. since May 1, 1993 but a
number of technical and administrative issues will need to be
addressed before full portability is available in Canada.

Portability will enable 800 Service[tm] customers to have a greater
choice of 800 numbers.

Business customers will be able to take their 800 numbers with them if
they decide to change carriers.

This will provide customers with greater convenience and will enable
them to take full advantage of the "equity" they have built up in
their 800 numbers with their customers.

Businesses with locations in both Canada and the U.S. will no longer
need more than one 800 number.

North American portability means that rather than haveing two separate
databases of 800 numbers (one for Canadian businesses and the other
for U.S.),all 800 numbers are pooled together into a single North
American database available to businesses located throughout Canada
and the U.S.

Portability allows businesses to keep their current 800 numbers if
they change carriers.

Advantages for business customers.

More and more, Canadian businesses are relying on 800 Service as a
valuable, reliable business tool that allows their customers to
contact them easily without incurring any long distance charges.

Many businesses invest heavily in terms of time, money and effort to
gain a presence in the marketplace and make their 800 numbers known to
their customers.

With portability, they won't have to risk losing the "equity" they've
built up and the investment they've made since they will be able to
retain the same number if they change carriers.

Customers with operations on both sides of the border will be able to
use the same 800 number.

Presently, Canadian businesses are limited to a relatively small
choice of 800 numbers.

With portability there will be more 800 numbers available to
businesses as they can choose from a larger, North American pool of
numbers.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 01:42 GMT
From: Christopher Zguris <[e-mail]>
Subject: FTP Address for CuD?


In past issues of the Digest the CuD Archives were mentioned but their
FTP address _was not_. Can someone provide the address? Thanks!


Christopher Zguris   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Surely ... try anonymous ftp eff.org. Two respon-
sible people at the EFF both wrote to the Digest today to state that
Computer Underground Digest would be remaining there. There are other
sites as well; Jim Thomas, a co-moderator of CuD may well see this and
write to you with more specifics.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Refunds For Certain 900 Calls
Date: 26 Jun 1993 16:49:18 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


A legal notice in the {New York Times} today talks of a program to get
refunds for those who dialed three particular 900 numbers.

The numbers are 900-446-3386, 900-726-2526, and 900-726-9988.  The
numbers were apparently provided by MCI to a company called Cesrap
Judging Organization and B L Bracken Judging Organization.

The program is being administered by the NY State Department of Law,
Bureau of Consumer Frauds.  120 Broadway, 3rd fl, NY NY 10271,
attention 900 unit.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza  New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578    fax [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven Warner)
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Interface
Organization: RTFM / beachSystems, Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 19:19:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (James Ian
McGowan) writes:

> Does any one know of an IBM-PC program that will send plain text files
> to an alpha pager?

I have offered one that runs in WINDOWS called swIXO.  Currently we
are holding sending any more out because of difficulty with a few
paging systems.  Once we iron out this problem we will make it
available again.

Swixo is shareware, $20 registration fee requested if you like it.

There are other programs that run in DOS, which retail for 50-$100.


Steven Warner  (34W 36L)  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cell/Pager Integration
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 14:34:00 PDT


Jody, after reading your lengthy account of setting up outcall notify,
I HAD to put my two cents in ...

Holy, moly!  I can't believe the trouble that you went though.  Don't
know your location (presume LA), but I have to tell you how SIMPLE it
is to set up outcall notification within the McCaw/LIN system.  This
includes LA Cellular.  Glad to hear your using voicemail on your
cellular.  I don't know how anyone can cost-effectively use cellular
without it.  Anyway, I use cellular the same way you were attempting
to:

1) Let cell call roll to voicemail to screen the call or when cellphone
is powered off (or in the car, etc.).

2) On receipt of voicemail, system (correct, it's Octel) outcalls to
your Skypage (or others) to alert you.

3) You check voicemail, return call as convenient.

My best advice to cellular customers is that you visit your local
Cellular One office for package that includes cellular AND paging
service.  They're VERY complimentary and using them together will help
you use your cellular service cost effectively (my cellphone is used
for home AND business purposes and I screen calls in the evening so I
don't have to talk to telemarketers).  If you are presently a Cellular
One or LA Cell customer and already have your cell and pager service,
just dial *611 at any time and ask Customer Care to set up 'outcall to
my pager'.  IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE.

I favor Skypage, since it covers the entire continent and alerts you
of calls while you're traveling.  Also, you can distribute your pager
number to associates who may need to reach you in emergency.  We also
have outcall notify on our corporate PBX/voicemail system and I've set
up my voicemail with the option for callers to mark messages urgent
(again, I get outcall to my Skypage with my corporate DID displayed on
the pager).  I favor the separate pager/cellphone approach because
it's always handy to be able to carry one without the other, depending
on situation.  On the weekend, you can always hand off the pager to a
spouse or child so you can keep in touch if necessary.


Regards,

Lynne

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Grabowski (KxiK))
Subject: How to Tell What Phone Number is When I Can't Dial?
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, New Jersey
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 04:45:58 GMT


  Something strange happened a few weeks ago. But I'm sure SOMEBODY
out there can figure this out ...

  I live in a fraternity house. Outside next to our front door, we've
got a little yellow box with a telephone handset in it. Pick it up and
you hear ringing, after which you are warmly greeted by a cheery
campus police person. This is a very good thing to have (not that it's
all that hard to dial the cops from any of the dozen or so phone lines
in the house), and I've used it on a couple occasions.

  A couple weeks ago, I was watching TV when I heard a phone ringing.
Was it the TV on the phone? Nooooo. It was the darn thing outside.
It's got a bell in it. I ran outside to answer it, but I didn't get it
in time.

  So, my question: How can I find out what the phone number is for
this thing? NJ Bell is no help. And it's impossible to dial "958" on
this phone, because a) there's no keypad, and more importantly, b) you
never get a dialtone. Apparently, the switch is programmed to merely
dial this one phone number. Hooking up a phone to the line will
instantly get you the campus cops (I wonder if they're sick of me
yet).

  Another question: Any idea how much my school pays for this thing?
There are about ten of them around. The school touts it as one of the
"wonderful" things they do for us, and frankly, I can think of dozens
of better ways for them to spend their money (Keg party, anyone?).


Dave
Kappa Xi Kappa - Over & Above Since 1964           [e-mail]
In Beautiful Newark, NJ (car theft capital USA) [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Dave, there is no phone number for it. Most likely
it is a ringdown private circuit. When either end goes off hook, the
other end starts ringing automatically. I doubt that it is programmed
to 'dial a number automatically when it goes off hook', although that
could be the case. More likely, it is just an arrangement in the CO
which (when the loop closes on either end) toggles something in the CO
and starts ringing on the opposite end. If it actually dialed a number
you would at least occassionally hear a bit of dialtone at the very
beginning as the dialer kicked in, or you would hear the tones, etc.

On the police end, these ten or so call boxes scattered around the
campus probably converge on a phone similar to a 12 or 20 button
(lines) call director instrument. The illuminated button for each line
tells the dispatcher which of the call boxes went off hook so he knows
where to send assistance. If it was ringing, most likely someone took
it off hook then hung up, or left the dispatcher thinking help might
be needed there; he was probably ringing back to speak with whoever
had called from there a few seconds earlier. Most PL's (private lines
as they are usually called) are charged by the mile or half-mile
between ends of the circuit. Thirty or forty dollars per month per
line is a good guess.  More than likely the dispatcher's unit is
arranged so he can tap a button on the console and bring the Newark
Police in on the call almost instantly if needed. Find something else
to play with and quit harassing the police. Some day you may need that
phone, when you do, let us know if it was worth a keg of beer or not.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Terry Kennedy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Step-by-Step Offices
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: 26 Jun 93 23:41:46 EDT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:

> By Panel do you mean a Crossbar switch? I'll agree that X-bars were
> noisy and hideous for connecting calls.

  No, panel was another style of switch altogether. It was used in
areas with high population density (big cities) while crossbar
deployed more in in smaller cities (or which has more widely spaced
CO's) and in the suburbs.  #1 crossbar, which supported about the same
number of subscriber lines as panel (one to five prefixes) was mainly
used to add capacity in cities as panel neared the end of
manufacturing life. In 1976, there were still 55 panel switches in
service, serving some 850,000 subscriber lines.

  Crossbar was virtually silent (on calls, not in the switchroom 8-)
compared to panel.

> [Moderator's Note: A curious thing about Wabash was that if the called
> line was busy you *always* got one, two or three rings first before it
> changed to a busy signal. And if the called party answered before the
> start of the second ring, the caller rarely heard a ring on his end at
> all!   PAT]

  Definitely sounds like panel to me. Further, "A History of
Engineering and Science in the Bell System - Switching Technology
(1925-1975)" says: "Panel systems were installed primarily in the
larger cities, such as Boston, Chicago, New York City, ...", so I tend
to believe that Pat's CO was panel.

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve
Forrette) writes:

> Well, Pacific Bell managed to provide Equal Access on #5 crossbars, if
> you can believe that.  They had some company fab up an electronic
> adjunt that connected to the xbar and implemented default carriers,
> 10XXX dialing, and so on.  I had service on such a switch on 415-848
> before was cut over to an electronic switch a couple of years ago.

  This sort of stuff was being experimented with by various groups.
One project even added electronic control to SxS equipment. At least
crossbar was easier to modify. In fact, the #4 crossbar (toll tandem)
was modified for complete electronic control, producing the 4A/ETS
toll switch. This is probably the most successful of these attempts.
Most never went to production because they would not be cost-effective,
compared with simply replacing the older switch with a 1ESS or newer
model.


Terry Kennedy        Operations Manager, Academic Computing
[e-mail]    St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
[e-mail]    [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Another curious thing about Wasbash was that the
payphone operators could not *return* money deposited on calls that
did not answer or the line was busy. On local calls like this, hanging
up caused the money to return as usual, but on long distance, if the
operator could not get through she would say "Hold for the return of
your money," ... there would be a click as she connected to another
operator who answered "Franklin Coin" (Franklin is a CO downtown) and
your operator would then say something like "Return on trunk 5076".
There would be a god-awful buzz in your earpiece, and your coins would
fall down into the return slot. Now and again the operator would make
a mistake and trip the collection table the wrong way; your operator
would immediately chastise Franklin, "Operator, I told you to RETURN,
not to COLLECT!"  Not to worry ... "Will you be trying the call again
in a few minutes sir?" (yes)  "Then just tell the operator you have
fifty-five cents credit coming from operator 479."  (or whoever).  PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Canadian Video on Demand Tests
From: woody <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 21:57:58 -0400


The Bell News for this week also reports that there will be a Video On
Demand (VOD) trial involving Bell/Stentor, Carleton University and the
University of Ottawa starting in January 1994. Course materials on
video can be called up via specially-equipped PC's connected to Bell
lines employing ADSL (asymmetrical digital subscriber loop) technol-
ogy. The hope is to expand the trial to another phase involving other
institutions after that.

------------------------------

Date: 26 Jun 93 08:47:00 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

>> This feature, of course, is to prevent the "memory effect" from
>> occuring. It also trickle-charges the battery after the green "full"
>> light comes on.

> Now this is an issue that has been written up both ways; some people
> say the "memory effect" is an Urban Legend, and that it only happens
> under laboratory conditions, and some people say it does happen in the
> real world.  Does anyone know of this *really* happening?

The "memory effect" is very real and measurable phenomenon.  I use an
Alexander "Tri-Analyzer" to condition two-way radio batteries that
exhibit the effect, though the analyzer can be configured to work with
just about any NiCad battery.  The analyzer does three deep
discharge/charge cycles and displays the battery capacity in mAh
(milliampere-hours).  A battery exhibiting the memory effect will show
a relatively lower reading at the beginning of a run, compared to the
reading at the end of a run.  Sometimes two or more runs are needed to
bring it back close to what it should be (factory spec).

All NiCad batteries will eventually lose their mAh capacity as they
age, and develop an internal short (which can sometimes be cleared
with a short duration pulse, but more about that in another article ;).
However, a battery exhibiting the memory effect will most likely fail
earlier than a similar battery that has had normal discharge and charge
cycles.

The "urban legend" comes from people who simply don't know, or don't
have reason to care (no one buys battery analyzers for cordless phones
and flashlights).  However people who earn their living with this
equipment know the real story, and probably chuckle when they consider
that they're part of the "legend." ;)


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 11:07:11 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Now this is an issue that has been written up both ways; some people
> say the "memory effect" is an Urban Legend, and that it only happens
> under laboratory conditions, and some people say it does happen in the
> real world.  Does anyone know of this *really* happening?

Problem is, how do you separate the "memory effect" from normal aging
?  On my laptop which is now about two years old, no amount of
charging will turn the "battery warning" light off yet it seems to run
for about the same time as when new. This would seem to be "aging".

If instead, the battery light did not come on until moments before
shut-down this would seem to be a memory effect.

Similarly, one would expect "memory effect" to show up as an increased
or sudden decline rate from the maximum while aging would show up as a
failure to reach the peak with essentially the same decline rate from
that point.

I know this is not an answer to the question, but rather an attempt to
quantify it for discussion.


Warmly,

Padgett

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 23:26:45 -0400
From: Carl G Moore Jr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Area Code and Prefix Each Off by One Digit


Try this:

Dana, Indiana (317) 665
West Dana, Illinois (217) 666

Confusion?


reply-to [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #428
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03491;
          27 Jun 93 15:32 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08593
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 26 Jun 1993 23:26:42 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01909
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 26 Jun 1993 23:26:10 -0500
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 23:26:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #427

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 26 Jun 93 23:26:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 427

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology (Ron Oberman)
    Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology (Paul Wallich)
    Re: Headset Equipped Cordless? (Trevor Deosaran)
    Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG) (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: DTMF Driven Answering Machines (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Are You a Prodigy Deadbeat? (Gideon Yuval)
    Re: Voice Mail Problem - No or Delayed Notification (Dale Chayes)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (Ehud Gavron)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed! (John Nagle)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed! (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Caller ID and Overseas Calls (Georg Schwarz)
    Re: AT&T Loyalty Program? (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Spread Spectrum Microwave in Europe (David Hough)
    Re: "Buyable" Specific Phone Numbers (Brian T. Vita)
    Re: PBX Information Wanted (Bonnie J Johnson)
    Re: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial (Eric P. Scott)
    Re: Blocking an Unlisted Number (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Sir? SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI! (Rev. Michael P. Deignan)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
 All article submissions MUST be sent to our email address: telecom@eecs.
nwu.edu -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 00:49:16 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


In Article <[e-mail]> Jerry Leichter
<[e-mail]> writes:

> No such constraints exist today.  Certainly, an ISDN phone could
> easily be set up to forward voice from the mouthpiece no matter what
> the "switchhook" state is -- that's probably just a bit in the
> software.  Building this into traditional analogue phones would be
> harder, but no big deal -- though why anyone should bother, except for
> bugging, I don't know.

In fact, my office has a specially modified AT&T ISDN 7506. It is in
an area where classified discussions take place, do the phone is
modified so that the switch-hook actually disconnects the microphone
and the "speaker phone" is physically disconnected.

Also, because government type acceptance is real pain, it is the most
featureless ISDN phone imaginable running V1.7 firmware. Since it is
unlikely AT&T will go through the hassle of getting type acceptance
for newer units any time soon, I'm stuck with a brain-dead phone. :-(
But at least I know that no one at the switch can turn on the mic and
listen in to what is said in my office.

Not sure which I prefer, but remember that with many ISDN phones the
mic CAN be turned on by software commands without ringing the phone.
(Not that I have any evidence such software is available the the
switch generics.)


R. Kevin Oberman    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: [e-mail]    [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul Wallich)
Subject: Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology
Date: 26 Jun 1993 16:58:58 -0400
Organization: Trivializers R Us


In <[e-mail]> Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
writes:

> That the mouthpiece is disconnected IS an accident of technology.

> No such constraints exist today.  Certainly, an ISDN phone could
> easily be set up to forward voice from the mouthpiece no matter what
> the "switchhook" state is -- that's probably just a bit in the
> software.

In point of fact, in ISDN speakerphones the microphone is controlled
from the switch (usually a PBX). You push the button to activate the
speaker, this tells the switch, which in turn tells the microphone to
turn on. Something about centralized architectures, I guess, but
almost perfect for bugging. People I've asked about this explain that
this is not a security risk because the little light on the
speakerphone would also go on, and so people would know that their
mike was live.  Uh-huh.


paul

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Trevor Deosaran)
Subject: Re: Headset Equipped Cordless?
Organization: Portal Communications Company
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 08:06:11 GMT



This is reference to another "nifty " device I am looking for.  I
would like a device which can talk to my cordless phone but allow me
to plug in my portable computer's modem (using standard jack); a sort
of cordless extension cord. I heard about the crap which runs thru the
power lines, but I would prefer if this was a small box with batteries
and a jack (and possibly a channel selector).


Thanks,

deo

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG)
Date: 26 Jun 1993 00:03:17 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


It is my understanding that Practicial Perphials is owned by Hayes.
The two that I have had a very much like the Hayes modems in looks as
well as the way they run.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 22:20:51 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: DTMF Driven Answering Machines


> Right you are, and still the security of this thing makes me giggle:

> A mere DTMF speed-dial program dials the complete string:
> (0212223242526272829208182838485868788898; 50 ms mark, 50 ms interval)
> in 3.950, say four seconds. Since the code is to be entered during the
> OGM, most of them are yours within one call.

Current models permit the code to be entered at any time during or
after the OGM.

This provides a much larger window.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 22:18:43 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards


>> I don't think there is any law against this -- it is the policy of the
>> credit card companies

> In California, it is a law.  This kind of special-interest legislation
> really makes me mad.  If a merchant has higher costs on a credit card
> transaction, he should be allowed to charge more.  But the banks
> pushed through this law in order to not discourage card use.

> Merchants get around it by offering a "cash discount" instead of a
> credit card surcharge.  The fine print on ads often reads "All prices
> reflect cash discount".

In Massachusetts, merchants can offer a discount for payment via cash
or check, but the advertised and/or marked price must be the
non-discounted price.  Merchants are prohibited from imposing a
surcharge for credit card purchases.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gideon Yuval)
Subject: Re: Are you a Prodigy Deadbeat?
Date: 27 Jun 93 03:44:08 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Paul Barnett) writes:

> Steve's final comment:  "Maybe they know a lot about computers.  But
> when it comes to business, they're no prodigy."

CompuServe plays the same game.


Gideon Yuval, [e-mail], 206-882-8080 (fax:-936-7329;TWX:160520)

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dale Chayes)
Subject: Re: Voice Mail Problem - No or Delayed Notification
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 15:31:23 GMT


I noticed recently that our AT&T Audix system is tagging messages with
times in the future (in the three to eight minute range.)  This was
supposed to have been reported to AT&T, but I haven't got any response
yet (which may not be AT&T's fault.)

At least once, it has recorded both sides of a conversation that did
not involve my extension, and then deposited the whole thing in my
voice message queue. I reported this as well: in fact, I forwarded the
message to our admin. He promised to report this to AT&T as well.
Also, no feedback yet.

There have been rumors, but none substantiated in my opinion, that
Audix has lost voice messages.

Find a copy of "The Design of Everday Things", (sorry, the author's
name escapes me at the moment) for an iluminating discussion about
users opinions of phone systems!


Have fun,

Dale Chayes   Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University
Internet: [e-mail]  Voice: [phone]  Fax: [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ehud Gavron)
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?
Date: 26 Jun 1993 18:52 MST
Organization: ACES Research Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
writes ... [from the Andromeda Strain]:

> He pulled out of his wallet a business card.  The only writing
> on it was:

>         Wildfire
>         Ext. 87

> He wondered what would happen if he dialed the binary of 87.

>  He took a piece of paper and wrote out:

>       1     2     4     8     16    32    64    128
>       1  +  2  +  4        +  16       +  64         = 87

>       1     1     1     0     1     0     1     0

>   1-110-1010.  A perfectly reasonable phone number.

Not at all.  Normally bit patters are written right to left:

    128    64    32    16    8    4    2    1
    ==========================================================
    0    1    0    1    0    1    1    1

> When I read this, I immediately deduced that wherever the novel was
> supposed to be set, it wasn't the present-day USA.

The original number 1-110-1010 wouldn't have worked because when the
Andromeda Strain was written, 1 was not a valid digit for the second
digit of an exchange.

The right-to-left ordered number is 01010111 which parses into    010 -
1 - 0111 which means "operator assisted international call, country
code 1 (usa), number 0111" which is clearly invalid.

You could erroneously parse it as 0-101-0111 but you'll find that
there are no exchanges or area codes which start with 10 or 11 to
avoid the conflict with direct and operator assisted international
dialing.


Ehud Gavron   (EG76)   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 15:00:06 -0700
From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!


       There is no "San Jose Harald" or "Herald".  There is only a San
Jose Mercury News.


John Nagle   Menlo Park, CA

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 17:45:06 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)


San Jose's newspaper is called the Mercury News.  There is no
mainstream paper called the San Jose Herald, unless perhaps it's in
Costa Rica :-)


Ed Greenberg           [e-mail]        Ham Radio: KM6CG

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Georg Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Caller ID and Overseas Calls
Date: 26 Jun 1993 16:45:44 GMT
Organization: TUBerlin/ZRZ


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Georg Schwarz) writes:

> Is the calling party's telephone number displayed on US/Canadian
> caller ID displays when the call originates from overseas (outside the
> +1 hemisphere)?  In case this feature is (not yet) implemented is it
> already technically possible? Is the necessary information (calling
> party's numer, country code etc.) being transfered "across the
> border"? Is there an international standard on the format of this
> data? What about the legal situation?

> [Moderator's Note: For my new service 'Telepassport' I will be getting
> the numbers of overseas callers, but it is not yet very common.  PAT]

Could you perhaps specify from which countries you are actually
getting the overseas callers' numbers, and whether it is the full
number or for example only the country code.


[Moderator's Note: Well, in order to call the party back and give them
USA dialtone, their entire number would have to be known. A lot of good
it would do to only know what country they were in!  There will also be
a 'call forwarding' option attached to this; similar to AT&T's Easy
Reach 700 plan. This will permit world travelers to have their calls
keep up with them.  PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: AT&T Loyalty Program?
From: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Date: 26 Jun 93 23:36:00 GMT
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)


Steve Moulton had the following to say about the AT&T Loyalty Program:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve
> Forrette) writes:

>> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
>> (Michael Rosen) writes:

>>> I tried calling 800-222-0300 the night I read the post here on
>>> TELECOM Digest.  At first the operator seemed to comprehend what I wa
>>> asking about but then she started going off about discounts of 25% to
>>> one area code I dial the most.  This did not sound like the
>>> loyalty program" described in the post of TD.

>> I called the 800-222-0300 number and asked about the Loyalty Program,
>> and the rep knew exactly what I was talking about.

> Same here, however, since I did not meet the minimum average monthly
> long distance billing at home (something like $30) neither the simple
> savings plan (25/15% discount) or the loyalty program (check for average
> monthly billing over six months) applied.  As usual with AT&T, the sales
>person seemed to know exactly what was going on.

Seeing all these posts about AT&T's domestic calling plans reminds me
of Sprint's advertisement featuring Candice Bergen where she jokingly
shows a very complex flowchart/state diagram and describes it as your
LD calling plan -- the point being with Sprint you don't have to worry
about it -- they take care of it for you (do they?)

I am just glad I make so few domestic LD calls that the carrier is
irrelevant. Navigating international LD plans is a little easier
although this month with MCI offering double discounts to F&F members
on Saturdays and AT&T apparently matching it via Special Country
savings on certain hours in the weekend, life has become a little more
complex.


Laurence Chiu   [e-mail]  <=== preferred e-mail address
The Transfer Station BBS [phone] & 837-5591 (V.32bis both lines)
Danville, California, USA. 1.5 GIG Files & FREE public Internet Access

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Hough)
Subject: Re: Spread Spectrum Microwave in Europe
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 18:29:32 +0000


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> I'd appreciate getting feedback from European (especially those from
> England, France, Belgium and the Netherlands) readers of TELECOM
> Digest regarding the legality of using spread spectrum digital radio
> microwave. In the United States one does not need an FCC license as
> per FCC Rule 15.247 to operate this type of microwave link since it
> has a very low power density spectrum and there is no need to
> coordinate frequencies. Does your country allow one to operate this
> without a license?

The UK (and possibly the whole of Europe) is allowing wireless LANs to
use a band somewhere around 2.4GHz. As far as I know, this will be
available without a licence using the type-approved equipment.

Sounds ideal for eavesdroppers and industrial espionage ... it might
be low power but it will propagate far enough for someone with the
right kit to pick it up from the street outside!


Dave     G4WRW @ GB7WRW.#41.GBR.EU AX25
[e-mail]  Internet   [e-mail]   Amprnet

------------------------------

Date: 26 Jun 93 23:53:20 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Buyable" Specific Phone Numbers


> C&P Telephone company will allow you, for an extra charge, to ask for a
> specific number if it's in your area and not in use.

When I have sent service orders for customers through to NET for
service (new or additional) they have let me request up to three
possible "choices" for vanity numbers with the order.  If one of the
three choices is available they let me have it at no charge, if not I
get the arbitrary choice.


Brian Vita      CSS, Inc.       CI$70702,2233

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 15:36:58 EDT
From: Bonnie J Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PBX Information Wanted


In response to Tommi Chen's request:

All the major PBX and CO manufacturers and vendors have done
comparisons of their own to the other vendors equipment.  In most
cases just a simple phone call asking for any comparisons they may
done will generate such a document.  But beware-there will also be a
storm of vendors at your door and possible some disparity on
comparisons when they find you are looking.


bj

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 18:14:53 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Eric P. Scott)
Subject: Re: AT&T "YOU WILL" Commercial
Organization: San Francisco State University
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Greg, try this version:  "U.S. Government.  We have a warrant."
>click!<

(Of course, future building codes will probably mandate a secret back
door, just for them.)


 -=EPS=-

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Blocking an Unlisted Number
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 17:29:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:

> You touch one of my pet peeves. Given that numbers are cheap (OK, in
> 1995 they'll be cheap), why can't one standardly have home ISDN that
> provides personal phone numbers for each person (or logical entity) in
> a household.  Sort of extended distinctive ringing. When placing a
> call one would have the option of identifying the caller either
> explicitly or by instrument (AKA phone) used?

Under the Massachusetts tariff for Residential (and business) ISDN,
additional telephone numbers are $1/month apiece.  So you can buy
numbers for the family.  However, most ISDN equipment expects the
numbers to identify the equipment, not a person.  I don't know of
anything that takes ISDN called line ID and uses it for, say,
distinctive ringing.  But I suppose it's a SMOP, right?


Fred R. Goldstein    k1io    [e-mail]
Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rev. Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Sir? SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI!
Organization: Small Business Systems, Incorporated, Smithfield, RI 02917
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 23:51:42 GMT


adiron![e-mail] (Tom Olin) writes:

> Actually, the operator *knew* the caller was a man, thanks to the new
> CGID service.  CGID stands for Calling Gender ID.

How does this service work with Pat, the androgynous person in
Saturday Nite Live skits? Or is she/he/it a hermaphrodite?


MD


[Moderator's Note: For a minute there, I thought you were going to ask
how does it work with Pat, the Virtual Moderator ... a service like CGID
would be a great feature on Compuserve in the CB Simulator Hot Chats.
Have you any idea how many times per night someone using a gender-neutral
handle like 'Pat' gets the message "/page <job #> are you m or f?  age?"
Usually I respond that I am an artificial intelligence program and that
my gender can be changed in software or from a dip switch setting which
will be the default each time I am rebooted. I tell them to type the
command '/sex' when talking to me to toggle the gender. And you know
what? One dunce *actually believed me*. When he tried it 'but couldn't
get it to work right' I suggested he call CIS customer service and ask
them to 'enable his account to use the gender-bender feature in CB'.
*His* phone call must have left them shaking their virtual heads in
wonder and amazement ... just when they thought they had heard it all
from their customers ...  :)    PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #427
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03543;
          27 Jun 93 15:32 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14619
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 26 Jun 1993 17:50:56 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30781
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 26 Jun 1993 17:50:22 -0500
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 17:50:22 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #426

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 26 Jun 93 17:50:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 426

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Future of ISDN (Nick Bryant)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Ron Trask)
    Re: How Much Code in Switch Software? (Rafe Colburn)
    Re: How Much Code in Switch Software? (Bob Haddleton)
    Re: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays (David H. Close)
    Re: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays (Daniel K. Cheng)
    Re: Buying a Cellular Phone (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Buying a Cellular Phone (Jim Rees)
    Re: Buying a Cellular Phone (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: Old-Time Party Lines (John Macdonald)
    Re: Step-by-Step Offices ([e-mail])
    Re: Step-by-Step Offices (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Sir?  SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI! (Jon Edelson)
    Re: Sir?  SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI! (Tom Olin)
    Re: Sir?  SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI! (Jeff Jonas)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
 All article submissions MUST be sent to our email address: telecom@eecs.
nwu.edu -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Nick Bryant)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 14:04:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Mark Fraser) writes:

>  While we're talking ISDN -- what is the status of the D-channel
>  capability in USA, Canada, Japan and Europe?  I have been led to
>  believe that Canadian deployment will limit the useful ness of
>  D-channel because "it threatens the security of the network" and
>  therefore will not be made available to anyone other than the
>  (monopoly) common carrier.  This brings up a point of potential
>  efficiency for Paging service providers, Cellular, PCS, competitive LD
>  carriers and a host of other application providers who could really
>  offer some whizbang services with D-channel access over and above the
>  crippleware exposed to date.  Comments?

It is my understanding that the present limitation on D Channel packet
service offerings in Canada has more to do with the regulatory issues
and the limitations of the DMS-100 switches which are used almost
exclusively for ISDN in Canada.

In order to comply with competitive rules, the telcos must allow users
of the X.25 system (over D channel) the ability to choose the X.25
carrier of their choice.  There is apparently no easy way to do this
at the present time (in a DMS-100 CO); the switch takes the packets
off the D channel through a packet handler, which is hard-wired (or at
least not easily switched) to the packet network.

I have no doubt that Northern is trying to do something about it, but
as with all things, it takes time and money.  It will come, however;
the telcos are desperately looking for ways to generate revenues from
the many dollars they have spent rolling out ISDN service to date.


* Nick Bryant, Member of Technical Staff | Opinions expressed are those of
* MPR Teltech Ltd. Burnaby, B.C. Canada  | the sender, and do not reflect
* [e-mail]  604-293-5319    | MPR Teltech policy or agreement.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ron Trask)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Organization: U S WEST Information Technologies
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 14:31:43 GMT


I forwarded a post that I pulled off of this news group to a friend
who worked on ISDN at US West in the early days before they had
successfully run any trials on ISDN. She was a major player in helping
to bring ISDN capabilities to US West. I thought I would share her
comments back to me with the rest of you. I found them enlightening.

Ron
                      -------------

Thanks for sharing the inquiry about ISDN.  I feel that the author
makes some good points, but he also seems to be wearing rose colored
glasses.

There are some real CPE issues around ISDN.  Today, if you buy a
terminal or a PC Adapter Card, you have to know what type of telephone
switch will provide your service because the interfaces are still not
standardized.  In addition, if you should move, you may have to
replace the interface card if you move into an exchange served by
another type of switch. (AT&T switch vs Northern Telcom switch.)

 Unfortunately, U S WEST's earlier tariffs for CENTREX service involved
a specific charge on NARs (Network Access Registers).  Now, IDN needs
multiple NARs for each line.  As a result, we have been unable to
develop a price that is reasonable for small business and residence
customers.

|We're seeing renewed interest in ISDN lately.  If we can overcome our
tariff and CPE interface issues there may be some hope for ISDN.
Another factor is the evolution of alternative access technologies.
As we begin to offer voice services through our Cable ventures, we
will have a much cheaper solution than ISDN and information services
(cataloges, banks, etc) to sweeten up the service offering.

I hate to be the pessimist, but I think that the RBOC's and Bellcore
put a death nail in the coffin of ISDN over the years.  They continued
to try to specify the interfaces through generic requirements and
standards proposals. In the meantime, AT&T focused on providing ISDN
and other data services through their PBX's and Toll Switches and
Northern Telecom developed design problems with their ISDN product
line.  From my ISDN experience, I learned that market demand
frequently creates defacto standards and that have a short window of
opportunity.  The ISDN window is still open, but the days are numbered.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rafe Colburn)
Subject: Re: How Much Code in Switch Software?
Date: 26 Jun 1993 15:20:44 GMT
Organization: University of Houston


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tom
Streeter) wrote:

>  There's a thread going on in alt.technology.misc that refuses to die,
>  and I was hoping someone here might have the information that will be
>  able to kill it.  At least as much as any fact can stop a thread,
>  anyway.

>  So, with no further ado: Roughly how many lines of code does the
>  software that controls digital switches like the 5ESS (to name but
>  one) use?  I know there are probably a number of variables to
>  consider, but I'm looking for ballpark here.  More than a million?
>  More than two million?

>  Thanks in advance, and be nice to PAT -- e-mail me instead of replying
>  back to the Digest.

Actually, I would be interested in seeing how much code there is in a
switch as well ...  I'm sure (I think) that other people are as well,
so if you would either post a) a synopsis of the responses here, or b)
if someone in the know would post about it, I'd appreciate it.  Or you
can mail me too.

Maybe our Moderator knows the answer anyway.


Rafe Colburn    University of Houston  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 11:21 CDT
Subject: Re: How Much Code in Switch Software?


Speaking entirely for myself and not AT&T or 5ESS, the last estimate I
heard for 5ESS was in the neighborhood of five to six million lines of
code.  Note that I say "code", meaning a mixture of C, assembly, and
several other languages that eventually compile out to C and assembly.

Since my job is software support for 5ESS, and I am in this code every
day, I have absolutely no problem believing these figures.

I think the Space Shuttle is supposed to have even more code -- this
doesn't surprise me either since it is triplicated, not just duplicated.


Bob Haddleton    AT&T Network System   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays
Date: 26 Jun 1993 05:08:29 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


[e-mail] (David Appell) writes about delays receiving mail via
attmail.

I can attest to similar experiences, with several messages delayed
more than two days!  Complaints to attmail!atthelp have usually been
followed (by about a week) with an assertion that their Internet
gateway had been down, was now fixed, sorry.  About two weeks ago I
received a nice note, unsolicited, following up my multiple
complaints, and stating that the gateway had just been significantly
upgraded.  I can't yet express an opinion on the effec- tiveness of
the upgrade, however.

On a related but different topic, why is it that email companies in
general seem to give lower priority to servicing requests sent by
email than to those called in via live telephone?


Dave Close, BS'66 Ec    [e-mail]  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Daniel K. Cheng)
Subject: Re: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays
Date: 26 Jun 1993 03:03:38 -0500
Organization: Speedway Free Access, dial 10288-1-503-520-2222


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David
Appell) writes:

>  Since last year I have been experiencing significant delays on mail
>  delivered from the Internet to my ATTmail account.  Delays of six
>  hours are normal, and 24 hours or more is not unheard of.  (During

>   (1) has anyone else been experiencing this problem?

    I think it really isn't AT&T's problem. AT&T Mail's internet
gateway, as far as I know, depends on ATT.COM (AT&T Bell Lab.) Incoming
mail is processed as soon as it is received. (I tried sending mail to
myself by "telnet attmail.com mail" and it gets there instantly, so
that means it isn't AT&T's problem).


Daniel Cheng    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Buying a Cellular Phone
From: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Date: 26 Jun 93 19:36:00 GMT
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)


In a article Justin Leavens had the following to say about buying
a cellular phone:

 >Anyone know the skinny on this deal? I got so confused and fed up with
 >the bull from these salesdroids that I decided to just forget the
 >whole thing.  They all seemed much more interested in signing me up
 >for service than selling me a phone. I know it's illegal in CA to
 >require activation at the time of purchase, and I believe it's also
 >illegal to offer different prices depending on activation. And what's
 >up with this rebate?

I saw the same scheme in Portland recently when I was up there on a
business trip. Phone prices looked incredible till I was told I had to
sign up with GTE Mobilnet. But I fail to see how Circuit City is doing
anything illegal. They are not requiring activation if you buy the
phone.  They are just saying if you do activate, then the Cellular
Carrier will show their appreciation by giving you a connection bonus
of $110. How is that different from the plans that GTE Mobilet are
offering here in the Bay Area. Sign up and get three months of free
weekend calling, worth at current rates about $45 since if you sign up
for the unlimited weekend calling plan it will cost you $15/month.

Just my thoughts.

As an aside, friends of mine in New Zealand tell me that Telecom
Cellular have a good deal going. Sign up for cellular service and they
will give you a free pocket phone for three months -- you pay for
airtime and monthly rental. If you don't like the service after three
months you can return the phone and the slate is clean. Good way to
get people to try the service before they make equipment purchase
commitments.


Laurence Chiu   [e-mail]   <=== preferred e-mail address
 The Transfer Station BBS [phone] & 837-5591 (V.32bis both lines)
 Danville, California, USA. 1.5 GIG Files & FREE public Internet Access

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Buying a Cellular Phone
Date: 26 Jun 1993 18:52:19 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Justin
Leavens) writes:

> 4. Both PacTel and LA Cellular seem identical in service price. Are
> there any preferences out there?

I hate LA Cellular.  They've got some kind of "roamer war" going on
with my carrier (Cell One of Detroit) and won't complete any calls at
all for me, even to 611, 711, or 0 (I didn't try 911).  And they don't
give me a nice reorder or a recording, either.  They blast a loud,
obnoxious siren at me.

PacTel won't let me roam either, but they'll at least let me talk to a
service rep, in case I want to set up temporary service.

------------------------------

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Buying a Cellular Phone
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 09:19:00 PDT


Justin,

Please check again on the service prices.  LA Cellular just released
new rate plans ...


Regards,

Lynne

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Macdonald)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 16:46:38 -0400
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
Subject: Re: Old-Time Party Lines


> Also, another small exchange next to us had a unique system, where
> the switch rang all the phones on the party line, but with a
> different combination of rings (1 short-2 long, etc.).  I learned
> about this from a high school teacher who was awakened many times in
> the middle of the night.

> [Moderator's Note: You are talking about a *long* time ago!   PAT]

Not that long.  At our family summer cottage, the phone service got
switched from multiple party line (with different rings) to 2-party
line (with only one of the phones ringing) just a couple of years ago.

I didn't get told that it had happened.

My parents tried to call us a number of times while we were there, but
of course it wasn't "our ring" so I never answered.  I found out later
when my sister-in-law came home and ran to answer the phone when I was
just letting it ring.

I think that they are now phasing out the party lines -- you can keep
an existing one, but you can't get a new one.


 John Macdonald   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 13:35:23 EDT
Subject: Re: Step-by-Step Offices


> Are you sure the "Cannonball" wasn't panel? SxS and Panel are two
> very different beasts, each with their own unique "features". Panel is
> known for its background noise and the utter lack of synchronization
> of audible with _anything_ (such as calling a busy number and getting
> ring back, and having it change to busy in the middle of the second
> ring), while SxS is quieter (except for a sound like cats being
> tortured if the mute contacts fail).

By Panel do you mean a Crossbar switch? I'll agree that X-bars were
noisy and hideous for connecting calls.

But you mention an interesting thing about switching from ring to busy
from the first to second ring. Our 1A ESS here in Providence does that
on occasion. It also drops calls, and other neat things. Of course it
has been in service for close to 20 years and I would imagine that
it's a bit tired.


Tony


[Moderator's Note: A curious thing about Wabash was that if the called
line was busy you *always* got one, two or three rings first before it
changed to a busy signal. And if the called party answered before the
start of the second ring, the caller rarely heard a ring on his end at
all!   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Step-by-Step Offices
Date: 26 Jun 1993 01:23:04 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> Terry Kennedy <TERRY@spcvxa.
spc.edu> writes:

[story about SxS switches deleted]

>  And then, people want "features" these days - TT dial, last number
 >redial, call waiting, etc. which weren't economically practical on the
 >older switch- es. The final nail in the coffin was the Bell breakup
 >and "Equal Access", which just wasn't going to happen on mechanical
 >switches.

Well, Pacific Bell managed to provide Equal Access on #5 crossbars, if
you can believe that.  They had some company fab up an electronic
adjunt that connected to the xbar and implemented default carriers,
10XXX dialing, and so on.  I had service on such a switch on 415-848
before was cut over to an electronic switch a couple of years ago.


S teve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jon Edelson)
Subject: Re: Sir?  SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI!
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 16:28:43 GMT


I have noticed recently 'Sir' being used where (for a woman) Ma'am
would have been used in the past.  See, for example, the address to
female officers in Star Trek, etc.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 09:17:27 EDT
From: adiron![e-mail] (Tom Olin)
Subject: Re: Sir?  SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI!
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Actually, the operator *knew* the caller was a man, thanks to the new
CGID service.  CGID stands for Calling Gender ID.  The service is not
yet widespread, and there has been some resistance to it, primarily
because it requires a special attachment to the customer's telephone.


 Tom Olin ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Will there be a way to block passing this
information to the called party?  :)     Virtual PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 15:04:56 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Re: Sir? SIR?? How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI!


In TELECOM, Toby Nixon wrote:

> Has anyone else noticed in the new radio commercial "introducing"
> 1-800-COLLECT, that the operator answers the phone with this line:

> "1-800-COLLECT.  What number would you like to call collect, sir?"

> No pause, no listening to the caller first, just call them sir.  How
> do THEY know its a "sir" calling?

> Give me a break.  You'd think in this day and age they'd be a bit more
> sensitive to this kind of thing. What's DOUBLY surprising is that
> they've been playing this ad for several weeks now here in Seattle,
> and nobody from MCI has heard it, noticed the problem, and caused it
> to be replaced!

Hmmm, years ago AT&T was sensitive to gender specific language, at
least internally.  The 'sexist' program of the Writer's WorkBench
(WWB) suite of text composition and formatting programs identifies
language that is gender specific and gives gender netural suggestions
(ex: repairperson for repairman).  The Affirmative Action program was
very active in making people aware of subtle discrimination due to
gender or race.

Even the AT&T ads are careful to have women in equal roles as men.  A
recent AT&T ad has a woman operator talking about her day, and how her
HUSBAND is the cook, and how after a long day at work, she looks
forward to HIM having the dinner ready and waiting!

Pperhaps MCI is too full of recent know-it-all MBAs who simply looked
up business phrases of "dear sir", etc.  I am not very tolerant of
recent MBAs.  I'm surrounded by them now and they say the silliest
things, with a straight face.


 Jeffrey Jonas   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Thank you for your fine meditation to close this
issue of the Digest, and to Tom Olin for describing this new feature
the Telephone Company is offering.   Virtual PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #426
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03585;
          27 Jun 93 15:33 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13152
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 26 Jun 1993 16:33:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20602
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 26 Jun 1993 16:33:10 -0500
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 16:33:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #425

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 26 Jun 93 16:33:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 425

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Another Stupid Rumor Bites the Dust (Mitchell Kapor)
    There is no EFF 'Sellout' (David Farber)
    International Toll-Free Standard Code? (Richard Cox)
    Australia -> US Calls (David Horvath)
    List of Switches/Exchanges/Carriers Wanted (Justin Greene)
    Small Mobile Radio (Kalpesh C. Mathuria)
    How Should I Terminate Incoming Modem Lines? (Uday Ivatury)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed! (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed! (Mike Riddle)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed! (Charles Stephens)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed! (Todd W. Carter)
    The Prank Message DID Have a BIG Tip-Off ... (Brad Collins )
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call? (Stan Hall)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call? (Mike King)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call? (Dan Cheng)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call? (Chernoff)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call? (A. Boritz)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call? (Tony)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call? (B. Fenner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 10:17:51 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Mitchell Kapor)
Subject: Another Stupid Rumor Bites the Dust


We have never contemplated removing CuD from the EFF ftp archive.  We
have believed and continue to believe it is important to let all voices
be heard and we are happy to do what we can.  It astounds me and
saddens me the extent to which unfounded rumor propagates on the net.
People need to have a little more faith, and, oh, maybe, ask us what
we're doing before jumping off in paranoid fantasies of EFF selling-out.

Here are the facts.  EFF's carriage of Phrack, not CUD, was costing us
$1,000 per month in additional tranmission charges.  After an internal
review, we decided we could not justify absorbing this rather
substantial expense for a single publication.  Monthly downloads of
Phrack constituted two gigabytes or more.  We have comunicated with the
editor of Phrack who has accepted our decision and has arranged for an
alternate site.

An analysis of the past year of traffic on eff.org revealed an
interesting pattern.  Roughly 40% of the total byte flow was due to a
single publication -- Phrack.  Another 40% was due to all other FTP
traffic from CuD and other publications.  The remaining 20% included
all of our email, FTP from the EFF archive, USENET, etc.

EFF contracted with UUNET to provide what is called low-volume T-1 service.
 That is, our instanteous bandwidth to the net is a T-1, which enables
fast through-put, but the $1,000 per month we pay is only intended to
give us an average bandwidth of 128 kilobits.  UUNET measures the five
minute average load in every segment and sends statistics to its
customers.  Because of the growth of traffic over the past year, EFF
has been running at as much as twice our contractual limit.  UUNET has
been billing us a surcharge of another $1,000 per month and was about
to permanently convert us to a full T-1 customer at $2,000 per month.
We felt we couldn't justify this expense, as the $12,000 per year
could pay for nearly half of a full-time staff member, for instance.

The solution we chose was to make a decision that we will stop
carrying Phrack in the near future.  This will enable us to continue
to provide all the rest of the services on our server for a good long
time without causing us more in the way of expenses.

People tend to think of FTP as a "free good".  It isn't.  Both storage and
transmission cost money.  Maybe it's time Phrack started charging?


Mitch Kapor   Chairman, Electronic Frontier Foundation
 Note permanent new email address for all correspondence as of 6/1/93
                        [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Thank you very much -- and I mean this sincerely --
for taking the time to write and set the record straight. I am glad
you intend to keep CuD, and I am sorry you feel Phrack has to leave.
I've never considered FTP to be 'free', or for that matter, any part
of the net, and I've always been amazed by the number of participants
who somehow feel the net and its features are an entitlement. In my
own case, Northwestern University and MIT (where the archives are kept)
have both tolerated my foibles for many years, and I've always been
grateful. Without either -- that is, if I had to *pay* for access -- I
don't know what I would do. I don't fault EFF for doing what it has to
do in the conduct of its affairs. I've always had philisophical diff-
erences with EFF, but I don't doubt your sincerity in your efforts.
Best wishes for your success as you continue your leadership of EFF.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 04:47:39 -0500
From: [e-mail] (David Farber)
Subject: There is no EFF 'Sellout'


Your message sounded like an announcement of a sellout. As a Board
member I object and at very least you can make sure your readers
undertstand that it has not been done and WILL not be done as long as
I and the current Board exist.

You have some responsibilities as an editor.

What would you say if I started a rumor that I have heard an
allegation that you are about to start censoring good comments re ATT
so as to make your telephone business more profitable. Surpose I do
that without asking you about the allegation. What would your reaction
be?


David Farber


[Moderator's Note: The above is a composite constructed by myself of
several messages exchanged between Mr. Farber and myself Friday
overnight and into Saturday morning and printed here with his okay.
Actually, it was one stalwart of EFF who started saying some of the
damndedest things I have ever heard earlier this year when I woke up
and smelled the coffee brewing. And I still hear the 'censorship'
thing all the time, only it is the other way around: supposedly I
promote AT&T in order to sell the Talk Tickets (the traffic from which
is carried by Mother). Another sub-set of the congregation claims I
censor AT&T in order to promote the Orange Card and the 800 numbers I
sell. Sigh. I know how you feel, Mr. Farber. I very much appreciate
Mitch Kapor setting the whole thing straight in his message. Maybe
another net-rumor will now be brought to a graceful end.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 15:49 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: International Toll-Free Standard Code
Reply-To: [e-mail]


David Leibold ([e-mail]) asked:

>  What international standards apply to domestic toll-free services, and
>  where is this established (if not an unspoken or informal standard) that
>  800 should be used for domestic service?

Mercury has indeed been saddled with 0500 in the UK.  There is an EEC
recommendation that there should be four "standard" telephone codes:
112 for emergency, 0 for national long distance, 00 for international,
and 800 for freephone (or green numbers as the French call them !)

A number of other countries are following this de-facto, rather than
de-jure, standard.  There is even talk of 00800 (011800 from the USA)
numbers for international freephone.


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail] - PGP2.2 public key available on request

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Horvath)
Subject: Australia -> US Calls
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 11:26:37 EDT


 I expect to be spending some time in Australia, New Zealand,
Switzerland, and possibly England in the August/September time frames.
What I need to know is how do I phone home?  I don't plan on taking any
circular saws, so the "E.T." method is out :-)

 I have the Orange Card and an AT&T Universal.  Based on the advertising
insert (from AT&T) in the Australian Visa application, I now know how to
use AT&T.  What are my other options?


 David Horvath


[Moderator's Note: If you were going to be overseas for an extended
period of time, or permanently, I would pitch my pending 'Telepassport'
program to you. For a short period of a month or two, probably your
AT&T Universal Card in connection with the call-USA program offered by
AT&T is your best, or at least most practical choice. Other readers
may have different ideas.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Justin Greene)
Subject: List of Switches/Exchanges/Carriers?
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix (sponsored by U. of Denver Math/CS dept.)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 04:26:27 GMT


I am trying to compile a list which would contain the following
information:

Name of switch
Type of switch
Exchanges on switch
Local Telephone company

This would be particularly useful for areas serviced by more then one
local carrier (like TX, MA, FL ... the list goes on), but the more
areas, the better.  If anyone is interested I would be happy to send
them copies of what I compile.

I am also interested in test numbers that might identify a switch, for
example, in most of NYC dialing 212/718-xxx-9901 will give you a
recording indicating the switch name, type and then a list of served
exchanges.  Of course, any other interesting numbers would be of
interest too (such as numbers which identify the number one is calling
from).  I just love numbers.  Thanks in advance.

Please E-mail me and I'll post a summary in a while.  If there are any
other places this post might fit in, please let me know (mailing
lists?)


-Justin

------------------------------

From: uhura1![e-mail] (Kalpesh C. Mathuria)
Subject: Small Mobile Radio
Organization: Stoner Associates, Inc.
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 21:35:22 GMT


This is the first time I am reading this newsgroup. I saw a paid for
'informercial' about SMR technology and the FCC giving licenses away
for it.  Does anyone know what the idea behind SMR is and its pros and
cons?

Please send me e-mail, I will post a summary.

Thank you.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Uday Ivatury)
Subject: How Should I Terminate Incoming Modem Lines
Date: 26 Jun 1993 09:56:23 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Hello,

If I'm ordering a bank of phone lines, all to be connected to modems,
what's the best thing to tell the phone company to terminate them in?
Should i ask for individual jacks? Some kind of group device?

I  suspect we will use a rack of modems or something similar.


Thanks,

Uday


[Moderator's Note: Depending on how many lines are involved, it might
be easiest to simply terminate each in an individual jack mounted on
the wall. Then you lable each jack with the phone number associated
with it. This makes it super-easy to swap modems and modular cord
around as desired to replace malfunctioning modems, etc. This also
enables you to test or busy out individual phone lines as needed
without any special equipment; just plug a phone into any modular jack
and use it. Also, if a line needs to be busied out because the modem
behind it is bad or whatever, there is a little modular plug you can
plug in the associated box on the wall which deliberatly shorts the
lines at that point making that line busy so whatever arrives there
sees a busy condition and hunts on to the next CO line.  How many
lines were you thinking about in the group?    PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 07:25:26 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator <telecom@eecs.
nwu.edu> writes:

> It appears we were the victim of a joke by our correspondent William Sohl.
> At least, that's the way it appears now.

> And I almost hate to ask, but is there such a newspaper as the {San
> Jose Herald}?

Someone who lives in that area can give a definite answer, but I
suspect not.  There is a paper named the {San Jose Mercury}, and these
days few cities can support more than one paper.


Rich Greenberg             Work: ETi Solutions, Oceanside CA 619-631-5280
N6LRT    TinselTown, USA   Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
I speak for myself only.       Canines: Chinook & Husky

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (mike riddle)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!
Date: 26 Jun 1993 12:25:19 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln


TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]> writes:

> Well, it looks like I was taken in also ... unless by the wildest of
> coincidence there are Mssrs. Dobbs, Parry and Carasso in the positions
> indicated above.

> And I almost hate to ask, but is there such a newspaper as the {San
> Jose Herald}?

There's one other tip-off, you'ld spot it if you were "into" obscure
workings of the Commission: Docket 37-42 would have been initiated in
*1937*.

I realize the TELECOM Digest is one of the oldest mailing lists/news-
groups on the net, and that its Moderator has been accused by some of
antediluvian philosophy from time to time, but not even PAT would
believe that the FCC started a docket in 1937 to address the communi-
cations network of 1997.

Methinks we've been had {again}.


[e-mail], [e-mail]
"I'm a guest at unlinfo, and the opinions expressed are not those of my hosts."
Finger for PGP 2.2 Public Key Block

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 13:03:46 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Charles Stephens (ast GA uucpMC - exp 1/9/93))
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!
Organization: Emory University, Dept of Math and CS


In article <[e-mail]> you wrote:

[Joke post deleted]

> And Bill Sohl, you should be *ashamed* of yourself!    :)

    If that _is_ his real name ....

> Patrick Townson

    Of course ... Is that your real name?  :)


Charles Stephens     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: William Sohl *is* a real person and has contributed
to the Digest on many occassions. His identity is not in question at
all. One of the reasons I pushed that article out soon after receipt
with a modicum of review is because he sent it. But I think he may
have been taken in by it also, and passed it along from some other
source unwittingly. As for me, I'm not sure, but you may call me the
Virtual Moderator if you like, or Virtual Patrick.  By now you may
have concluded that Friday was *not* a good day here.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 09:47:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Todd W. Carter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed in Digest


As a journalist who covers telecom issues on Capitol Hill, I can
assure you this is bogus.  Not to mention that line items in budget
bills are not called "dockets."


Todd


[Virtual Moderator's Virtual Note: And you mean the Reverend Bob Dobbs
is not a spokesperson for Billary, our resident president now in power?
 Here at the Virtual Digest's virtual editorial office today I even
received a couple letters from people *who had actually already written
to Gore* in protest. Early-risers, they got up this morning, read the
Digest and fired off letters to our vice-commander-in-chief. They sent
copies of their letters for review here; one even sent a sample letter
everyone could write (signing their own virtual name of course, not
his, thank you!). Can't you just see the White House correspondents
sitting there scratching their virtual heads, wondering how *this one*
got started. :) Ah, the power of this net!  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brad Collins)
Date: 26 Jun 93 08:06:42 GMT
Subject: The Prank Message DID Have a BIG Tip-Off...


>             UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this

>                  IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED.

Pat,

This was supposed to be the tip-off.  Have you already forgotten
internet legend Robert McElwaine.  This is how McElwaine signed all of
his posts.

If you don't know McElwaine, and his wacko posts about synthetic
humans and giant Soviet anti-gravity aircraft called Jumbo
cosmospheres, then ask around, there is even an FAQ floating around
discribing his activities in detail.

I would never take a post seriously that used this sig.


Brad Collins    [e-mail]     Hong Kong


[Virtual Moderator's Virtual Reply: I guess I am just to pure at
heart to have caught on. I don't spend much time reading Usenet stuff
so I guess I've missed his enlightening commentaries.  Virtual PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
From: [e-mail] (Stan Hall)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 12:09:04 CDT
Organization: The Eternal Apprentice BBS, Oklahoma City, Ok


[e-mail] (Michael Rosen) writes:

> The call went like this:

> "AT&T with a collect call from, state your name please."

> And then his son stated his name.  Have they eliminated the practice
> of asking for the caller's name straight off and relaying it to the
> called party?

> [Moderator's Note: There have been no changes. All that happened was
> the operator screwed up -- forgot to ask it at first -- and had to get
> it after the fact. It happens.   PAT]

 I wouldn't be so sure.  I have received several collect calls from
 a friend of mine out of state and this is the usual format that
 I have encountered.


[e-mail] (Stan Hall)
The Eternal Apprentice BBS, Oklahoma City, OK -- [phone]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 16:39:43 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?


In TELECOM Digest, V13 #420, [e-mail] (Michael Rosen) writes:

> The call went like this:

> "AT&T with a collect call from, state your name please."

> And then his son stated his name.  Have they eliminated the practice
> of asking for the caller's name straight off and relaying it to the
> called party?

and Pat replied:

> [Moderator's Note: There have been no changes. All that happened was
> the operator screwed up -- forgot to ask it at first -- and had to get
> it after the fact. It happens.   PAT]

I've had it happen several times with AT&T operators: I dial 0+, and
when the operator answers ("Thank you for using..."), I say, "I'd like
to make this call collect, please.  My name is Mike..."  S/he thanks
me, and a moment later, I hear ringback and the answer at the far end.
A *different* operator says, "AT&T with a collect call from, caller
state your name please."  After I say my name, the other party accepts
the call.

I keep forgetting to try without stating my name the first time.  My
guess is the call is handed off to an operator closer to the
destination of the call, with no interaction between the two.  Perhaps
the display indicates the type of call?


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Daniel K. Cheng)
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
Date: 25 Jun 1993 18:41:52 -0500
Organization: Speedway Free Access, dial 10288-1-503-520-2222
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Actually, that's AT&T's common practice now. They would get the number
from you, call the number and say: "This is AT&T w/ a collect call
from, caller please state your name." Then, "Would you accept the
charges?"


Daniel Cheng    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Michael Benjamin Chernoff <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 14:39:50 -0400
Organization: Senior, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon


I'm not so sure about that.  I placed a collect call using AT&T the
other day.  I placed the call by dialing 0-XXX-XXX-XXXX and then heard
the "AT&T, please..." message.  I then waited and receieved a message
requesting that I speak the word "COLLECT", "PERSON-TO-PERSON", or
something else (which I do not remember).  I said "COLLECT" and the
call went through.  Then, when the called party answered the phone,
the operator broke in and asked if they would accept a call from ...
[Operator then asked me my name] which the called party could hear,
then the called party asked the operator when the call was from, and I
answered my location.  It was then that the call was accepted.


-Michael

------------------------------

Date: 26 Jun 93 07:37:03 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?


 I beg your pardon, Virtual Pat, but we discussed this issue right
here, when I wrote about how AT&T REFUSED to take the caller's name on
collect calls from coin phones in downtown Detroit, then disabled the
phone when the caller complained to the AT&T operator.  It's probably
the result of one of "Mother's" pinhead business managers that figures
he can cut down on some narrow segment of coin fraud by inconveniencing
the majority of customers in an area where complaints about TELCO fraud
 would be unlikely.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 13:36:27 EDT
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?


You mean they still use human being for collect calls? Here in NET
land we use a computer. When you place a 0+ call and don't dial a
calling card number within a set period of time, the computer comes on
and asks if you'd like to make a collect call. If you answer yes, it
asks you for your name and then proceeds to call the other party and
states:

"I have a collect call from {your_name}, if you wish to accept the
call please say yes, if not, hang up."

So far it seems to be working out without any major flaws.


Tony

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (William C Fenner)
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
Organization: NRL Connection Machine Facility, Washington, DC
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 16:49:46 GMT


In the process of making arrangements for moving to my new job, I had
to phone my new employer collect many times.  Each time, the AT&T
operator would come on, I'd say "I'd like to make a collect call,
please," they would say "Thank you", ring the number, and say
something similar to the above, asking me to state my name to the
person who answered.


Bill Fenner   [e-mail]


[Virtual Moderator's Virtual Note: And my thanks to these seven and
other virtual participants for setting still another record straight.
No siree, Friday was not a good day here!    Virtual PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #425
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03616;
          27 Jun 93 15:33 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13978
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 22:36:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25922
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 22:35:41 -0500
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 22:35:41 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed in Digest


It appears we were the victim of a joke by our correspondent William Sohl.
At least, that's the way it appears now.

On Friday evening, I received and printed a message about a 'new modem
tax' ... actually, 'user fees' proposed by our President.

After the message had gone out to the net, I received the following
reply which I though important enough to 'stop the presses' and send
out as a special statement:

Please read it, and draw your own conclusions. I would appreciate it
if Mr. Sohl would explain *why* he sent this here without at least a
tip off that it was supposed to be a joke -- that is, unless it is
real, but the more I think about it, the less likely it is.


Patrick Townson


   Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 19:47:52 PDT
   From: [e-mail]
   Subject: Re: "Fees" Hidden in Budget Will Cost You $$$$!!

 In article <[e-mail]>, you comment:

   Moderator's Note: Well I didn't vote for Hillary and her husband, so
   don't blame me. You could try writing to '[e-mail]' to
   express your displeasure, but I can't imagine it would do any good.
   The above article will no doubt be in circulation on Compuserve, GEnie,
   Delphi and the other commercial services in the next day or two with
   exhortations from the proprietors to write in protest. A better solution
   would be to get Clinton out of office in 1996 -- or sooner!   PAT]

Yeah, but take another look.  J.R. Dobbs?  The titular founder of the
Church of the Subgenius?  James Parry?  Aka "Kibo", Usenet star?
Roger Carasso?  Usenet flame-drawer extraordinaire?  Methinks you've
been had here.  Someone's trying to start another "FCC Modem Tax"
urban legend, and not very seriously, either.


In article <[e-mail]>, Bill Sohl writes:

    Excerpted from {The San Jose Herald}.

|BY ROBERT DOBSON
|Herald Washington Bureau

      WASHINGTON - The Senate moved toward approving its version of
 President's Clinton's budget package early this morning, a move that
 is expected to set the stage for a showdown over "hidden taxes" and
 spending in a House-Senate conference committee. At which time,
 conservatives in the Senate say they will fight efforts to increase
 taxes and spending which they say is hidden in the legislation.
 Singled out was $60 million to be used to finance the National Data
 Network that Vice-President Gore is a supporter of.

      The $60 million is to be raised by the imposition of a tax on the
 manufacturers of telecommunications hardware and by fees on the users
 of such equipment, known as modems. "We used the Pittman-Robertson
 act, which finances conservation efforts through a tax on firearms and
 ammunition, as a model," said Congressional spokesperson Bonnie Houck.
 "The people purchasing and using this type of equipment are affluent
 and well off. It's fair, it's not taxation, this is a progressive
 measure that asks the users of a resource to pay for the costs of that
 resource."

      Clinton Administration spokesperson J. R. Dobbs cautioned against
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^
 calling the fees a tax; "Inaccurate buzz words like `modem fees' and
 allusions to `modem taxes' produce knee-jerk reactions that
 short-circuit constructive inquiry into a vital public issue.
 Telecommunications users from all sectors - educators, small business,
 local governments, public service entities. Libraries and recreational
 users - should take strong interest in how the next generation of
 telecommunications networks will be developed and financed.

      The newly authorized user fees are concealed in an obscure line
 item (Docket 37-42 of the Data Communications Network Architecture, or
 DCNA proposal), "the implications of which NO ONE at this time fully
 understands," according to noted MIT communications policy expert
 James Parry. These changes would require telecommunications users to
^^^^^^^^^^^^
 pay "usage sensitive" carrier charges.


      Roger Carasso is a special assistant to the chief of the Common
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 Carrier Bureau at the FCC. He said it made sense that someone using a
 14,400 bps modem pay more than someone using a 2400 bps modem. He also
 commented that it was good policy to have the fees collected by modem
 manufacturers and the regional Bell operating companies (RBOC's).
 "That way the users don't see the government involved in the same old
 `tax and spend'. In this case the users can take pride in the fact
 that they are, in fact, directly financing the new `data superhighway'
 while, at the same time, freeing up scarce government resources for
 truly necessary social programs such as Medicare, food stamps and
 education."


            UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this
                 IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED.


                       -------------------

Mike O'Brien   [e-mail]


Well, it looks like I was taken in also ... unless by the wildest of
coincidence there are Mssrs. Dobbs, Parry and Carasso in the positions
indicated above.

And I almost hate to ask, but is there such a newspaper as the {San
Jose Herald}?

'Unaltered reproduction and dissemination encouraged ...'  yeah, you
bet.  If anyone else has started circulating this, let's cancel the
messages until some clarification arrives, eh?

And Bill Sohl, you should be *ashamed* of yourself!    :)


Patrick Townson











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03629;
          27 Jun 93 15:34 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30128
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 22:10:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19924
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 22:10:01 -0500
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 22:10:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #424

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 25 Jun 93 22:10:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 424

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Tropez 900MHz Digital Cordless Phone (Adrian Brandt)
    Answers: Public Internet Access in Japan (Aaron Dailey)
    Sprint Does it Again! (Thomas I. M. Ho)
    Vartec Telecom (Ken Jongsma)
    TelCo's Line Protector - How Good? (Bob Kupiec)
    More Orange Card Bill Abbreviations (Carl Moore)
    79th Street CO in New York, NY (Carl Moore)
    What's Happened to AT&T? (Alan Boritz)
    Caller ID is Not Privacy (Charles McGuinness)
    Caller-ID Mistakes (Les Reeves)
    Re: Anomynity, Privacy and the Technological Imperative (Jeffrey Jonas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Tropez 900MHz digital cordless phone
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 23:54:29 GMT


My first impressions/review:

      VTech's Tropez 900DX, a 900MHz digital cordless phone
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I just bought the (relatively) new Tropez 900DX cordless phone (by
VTech Communications in Beaverton, Oregon) from J&R Music World.

It's 900MHz and is digital.  It has 20 handset/base channel pairs.  It
"automagically" does channel select/change and randomly selects one of
"65,000" (probably 65,535, or 16 bits) security codes every time the
handset is placed on the base charger.

I really like it so far, but I've only had it two days.  It's got a
lot of other nice touches.  Things like when the handset is on the
base and you get an incoming call, you can pick up handset and start
talking without having to press the "Phone" button.

Both the handset and the base can independently be programmed to have
one of 4 possible rings.  There is a "privacy" button on both the
handset and the base in order to lock-out the speakerphone from the
handset or the handset from the speakerphone.  The intercom can be
used without preventing incoming calls and by putting callers with the
"hold" key the intercom can be used while a call is in progress.

When a call is put on hold, both the caller and you hear a beep every
20 seconds or so to indicate that the call is still connected.  If
another phone on the same line is picked up while a call is on hold,
the Tropez automatically "drops-out" and goes back into standby mode.

The handset and base constantly "ping" each other to check if the
handset is in range.  If the handset goes out of range it beeps every
30 seconds or so to warn you that you might miss a call.  The out of
range beep will stop if acknowledged with a key press on the handset
or if the handset is moved back into range.

There is a digital volume control on both the handset and the base
speakerphone.

Sound quality is the best I've heard in a cordless yet, and of course
it's snap, crack, pop and hiss free (thanks to digital transmission).
However, I did detect a slight, but noticeable, difference between the
Tropez and a corded phone when I called home.  The corded phone did
sound a bit sharper/crisper.  Unless you were looking for it, or
unless someone was switching back and forth between the Tropez and a
corded phone, I doubt anyone would ever suspect you were using a
cordless.

I haven't had a chance to conduct a good range test yet, though I've
heard that it's markedly better than any of the standard 46/49Mhz
phones.  The antenna on the handset is non-retractable, about four
inches, very flexible and coated with black rubber.  The base antenna
is about the same length, black metal, mounted on the side of the base
with a two-way metal joint.  (The whole phone is black, and I think
that's the only color it comes in.)  The buttons are okay.  I'd like
it if they were a little firmer and if they stuck up out of the
plastic moulding a little higher.

I don't know about battery life yet either.  The battery is NiCd, but
seems to be beefier than standard cordless batteries.  (It's 6V and
costs $29! as a replacement part from Tropez.)  It does give the hand-
set a very heavy/solid/high-quality feel.

I am very satisfied with this phone so far, and based on what I know,
would heartily recommend it to anyone tired of buzzing and futzing on
their 46/49 phones.

It's still a bit pricey at $279 from J&R.  There's also a lower cost
version of the same phone out called the 900SX.  It leaves off the
speakerphone (& intercom?) and base keypad.  Although I think I saw a
"Made in China" sticker on the box, VTech *appears* to be a US company
(for those who care about such things), and their product is
significantly cheaper than all the competing 900MHz phones I've either
priced or heard about.  Panasonic's 900MHz cordless, for example,
costs more, is NOT digital, and so its still easy to eavesdrop on it
with a scanner.


Adrian Brandt [phone]
UUCP: ...!portal!ntmtv!adrian
INTERNET: [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Aaron Dailey)
Subject: Answers: Public Internet Access in Japan
Organization: StorageTek
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 00:40:33 GMT


A while ago I asked about how to access the Internet, email in
particular, from Japan.  Here is the best answer, I got it from the
TWICs people, but I think it's from the soc.japan FAQ:

     ---- Internet Mail in Japan 93/05/21 ----

     Note: This is only for mail. As far as I know there is no publicly
     accessible ftp/telnet to the Internet in Japan at this time.

     1) Join NiftyServe or PC-VAN and pay 20 yen/K for mail to selected
     domains within Japan. NiftyServe has a link to CompuServe and
     PC-VAN has a link to Genie for something like 70 yen/minute; once
     you are on the U.S.-side you can send/receive Internet mail.

     2) Join CompuServe in the U.S. and access it via TYMPAS (TYMNET) for
     ~70 yen/minute. Some people also call direct at 110+ yen/minute
     (depending on time of day) with high speed modems and claim they
     it's better for large file transfers than TYMPAS which is only 2400
     BPS. CompuServe can also be accessed via FENICS and instead of
     CompuServe you might consider any host outside Japan you can get to
     via X.25 Public Data Network.

     3) Join Aegis in Kyoto for a UNIX host + BBS-like front end. 5,000
     yen signup, 20,000 yen/year + 20 yen/K for mail to all other
     addresses against a deposit of 10,000 yen. Access is direct dial-up
     up only. Send mail to [e-mail] for details.

     4) Join TWICS in Tokyo for a VAX/VMS-host with PARTI/CAUCUS and an
     AUS USENET newsreader. 5,000 yen deposit/signup + 3,000 yen/month,
     mail inside Japan at no extra charge, charges for mail outside of
     Japan free for the first 24K/month and 45 yen/K afterwards. TWICS is
     well connected to other systems via DASNET at varying additional
     charges. Access via direct dial-up, TYMPAS, DDX. Send mail to
     [e-mail] for details.

     5) Set up your own UUCP host and join Juice. 5,000 yen to join plus
     1,000 yen/month, mail within Japan OK, not sure about international
     but most probably via KDDlabs' Inet Club which is 30 yen/K. Access
     via direct dial-up. Send mail to [e-mail] for details.

     For international netmail, you will need to subscribe to KDD's
     InetClub. Charges are ~2,000 yen/month and up according to how many
     people are at your site, plus 30 yen/K. Also, you may need to call
     their site in Saitama directly, unless you want to route through
     somebody else, thereby making them subsidize your traffic. Contact
     [e-mail] for details.

     6) Set up your own UUCP host and join IIJ (Internet Initiative Japan).
     30,000 yen to join, 2,000 yen/month, 30 yen/minute. Nodes will go
     up in the Kanto area in May. Contact [e-mail].

     7) AT&T mail. Registration Fee 15,000 yen. Outgoing mail: 1000 bytes
     420 yen (U.S. recipient on another network); 2000 bytes 560 yen (420
     + 140); 3000 bytes 670 yen (560 + 110); above 3000 670 + 105 yen/K.
     (Note - if you purchase AT&T access software for 30,000 to 60,000
     yen depending on system, you recieve a discount of 60 yen/K).
     Incoming mail: no charge after registration. Contact: AT&T Jens
     Corp.  No. 25 Mori Building, 1-4-30 Roppongi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106
     Tel: [phone] (Osaka: 06-946-2411), Fax: [phone] (Osaka:
     06-946-2412).

The TWICs people will be direct connected in the near future I
believe.

I found another option, MCI Mail, which turned out to be the best for
my brother.  It's about $.50/minute connect time, plus a monthly fee,
but they have a program that lets you compose and read messages
off-line.  They can be reached in the US at 1-800-444-MAIL.


Aaron Dailey Internet: [e-mail]
StorageTek Corporation   Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]
Mail:  MS0242, 2270 South 88th Street, Louisville, C0 80028

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1993 09:46:59 +0800 (SST)
From: Thomas I. M. Ho <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sprint Does it Again!


I recently moved to Singapore.  When I gave up my US phone number, MCI
allowed me to keep an account with them and I still get my F&F
discount when I use MCI Call USA although I usually use Singapore
Telecom since it's cheaper.

Recently, my ex-wife switched from MCI to Sprint so I no longer get
any F&F discount when I call my son who lives with her.  I tried to
get a World Traveler FONcard from Sprint and asked if I could get the
36% combined "Most" and Sprint customer discount if I called my wife's
number the most.  Of course, they want me to switch to Sprint, but I
can't since I don't have a US phone number!  So, of course, I might as
well continue to use MCI and Singapore Telecom.

I gave them my name and phone number and told them to call me if they
come up with a program to encourage me to take my US calling business
to them.  Does anyone expect that they'll come up with something?  I
doubt it.  For residential long-distance services, they haven't
figured out that a global market exists there as well as in business!

I guess that I should look into one of those services that calls back
and gives US dial tone.  Any recommendations?


Dr. Thomas I. M. Ho   Senior Fellow
National University of Singapore
Department of Information Systems & Computer Science
Lower Kent Ridge Road   Singapore 0511   REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE
Voice:[phone]/2727 (ISCS general office)/775 6666 (University switchboard)
Fax:   [phone]    Telegram:  UNIVSPORE
Home:  [phone] (especially for those who are many time zones away)
    1E Gillman Heights #12-41
    Singapore 0410


[Moderator's Note: Yes, I have a recommendation for US dial tone providers!
Me! I am going to be offering a new service called 'Telepassport'
real soon. I am very eager and anxious to get this underway, but the
people who are setting it up keep shushing me and telling me to be
quiet for the time being ... otherwise I would tell you more. I can tell
anyone interested this much: international users will call my office on
lines installed for the purpose. They will let it ring once or twice
(best to have it ring twice to be sure I catch the signal) then hang up.

My equipment will call them back and give them US dial tone at US
rates. They can call anywhere in the world at that point, including of
course the USA.  This won't be open-ended; the people using it will
have to establish accounts first. When everything is ready to go, I
will have rates and other information here including how to establish
an account and how to place calls, etc. As with other products and
services, I will earn residuals.  More news in a few days.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 25 Jun 93 19:25:55 EDT
From: Ken Jongsma <[e-mail]>
Subject: Vartec Telecom


It would appear that one of Judge Greene's visions has come true:

Today in the mail, I received a letter from a company called VarTec
Telecom.  They are a long distance reseller, but curiously enough,
were not asking that I sign up as a dial 1 customer. Instead, they
included a number of stickers with their 10XXX code (10811) and
instructions on how to dial using this code.

Their gimmick? They claim that every 10th call will be billed at .01
for calls up to ten minutes.

Billing is to be via the local operating company bill and no advanced
signup or minimum billing is required. They don't quote costs, except
to say that they will be cheaper than a comparable cost via the big
three.

They explicitly state that you can use them to avoid Michigan Bell's
intralata rates.

Now, I don't plan on using them, but it is interesting to see someone
marketing long distance in this fashion.


 Ken Jongsma     [e-mail]    Smiths Industries

------------------------------

Subject: TelCo's Line Protector - How Good?
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 18:14:30 EDT
From: Bob Kupiec <olwejo![e-mail]>
Reply-To: beyonet![e-mail]


Hello fellow Digest readers!

I remember a debate about surge suppression on telephone lines and I
was wondering if what the TelCo put on the line is adequate?  It is a
small black object (about 3"x2"x2") with tip and ring from telco and
my tip and ring connected to the SAME lugs.  There is a ground lug
which is grounded.

There are two white "caps" on it marked "AT&T 11B2A".  The back of the
device has the following: "Western Electric -- Line Protector -- UL
Listed"

Does anyone know what this is?  Is it standard?  Will it protect my
line and the devices attached to it? (i.e. phones, modem, computer, if
line struck by lightning).

Thank you for your help.


Bob Kupiec, N3MML   Internet: beyonet![e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 15:59:46 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: More Orange Card Bill Abbreviations


My latest Orange Card bill has some calls from points from outside of
Delaware and northeastern Maryland, which have been giving me FRM
(From) abbreviations of MAK and BAL respectively.  Those other places
showed up with these abbreviations:

One call from 609-882 near Trenton, NJ had CAM.
One call from 908-735 near Clinton, NJ (along I-78) had CLI.
One call from 717-548 (southern Lancaster County, Pa.) and two calls from
Manhattan (1 of them was from 212-246) had 800.
One call from 215-494 (along I-95 just north of Pa./Del. state line)
had FTW.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 15:56:12 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: 79th Street CO in New York, NY


I called 212-327-9901 and got the following list of exchanges for,
according to the recording, the 79th Street office:

249,434,452,535,628,639,650,746,771,861,879,988 but 327 (which would
duplicate what is now 718-327 in Far Rockaway) is not included.

------------------------------

Date: 25 Jun 93 20:43:18 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: What's Happened to AT&T?


[e-mail] writes:

> I've had some very bad experiences with AT&T customer service lately.

> A couple of days later I found out that AT&T was running the special
> one month of nine cents/minute for the month of May only, changing to
> eleven cents/minute.  I was clearly misled by this representative,
> especially since my plan would be connected on June 1st.

Oh, that's nothing.  Three AT&T reps (on different days) gave me a
different start date for basic ROA's extended hours (7 p.m. LT instead
of 10 p.m. LT).  The second rep refused to correct the overcharges
caused by the first rep, and the third rep adjusted one bill only
because I told her AT&T would lose my employer's business, too (that
routine never worked when I worked for Helmsley-Spear ;).

> Yesterday, I got a letter in the mail, dated June 7th, welcoming me to
> Any Hour Savings, which went into effect on June 5th.  What the hell
> is going on?!

Either too many stupid people in one place at one time, or AT&T's
women-folk were still dazzeled after Tom Sellick came to visit
"Mother's house." ;)


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I think you are being sort of sexist. It has been
my experience that AT&T's men-folk get easily upset at times also.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: marks![e-mail] (Charles McGuinness)
Subject: Caller ID is Not Privacy
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 10:00:13 EDT


The problem with the debate on Caller-ID, alas, is that it is
endlessly recycling the same set of arguments of why it is wonderful
or why it is evil.  Too bad Caller-ID is mostly irrelevant.

We might as well be debating whether the PicturePhone (tm) is likely
to catch you nude if you jump out of the shower to answer a call.
Caller ID is dying: the market isn't buying it given its current price
and performance.

Personally, I think Caller-ID is mostly a ploy by the telcos to raise
additional revenue.  Our debating it as if it were a significant
privacy issue is silly.  Privacy isn't knowing the phone number of the
fool who's calling you at 3am.  Privacy is not having that call get
through in the first place!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 19:18:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Mistakes


I must report that Caller-ID can indeed have mistakes.  I do mean
*mistakes*, not errors such as garbled digits.

Recently I noticed that occasionally my Caller-ID display would show
the number of the next-to-the-last caller rather than the last caller.

First I eliminated my CID hardware as a possible culprit by using two
dissimilar CID devices.

Both devices marched in step.  When a CID error came through, both
devices showed the same number.

As it turned out, the errored CID packets would show the correct date
and time, but the previous incoming call number.

These errors became more and more prevalent until the number on the
CID packet became a joke!

This lasted for about two or three days, and then it seemed to "fix
itself".

The errors were confirmed by two stage (talking) call return.  Call
return seems to have the correct information.

Computers may not make mistakes, but attached processors to ESS
switches CAN!

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 14:53:38 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Re: Anomynity, Privacy and the Technological Imperative


In X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 417, Message 6 of 12
Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]> said:

> (BTW, if you think this is completely fanciful, note that many newer
> workstations have built-in microphones and digitizers.  In at least
> some models -- Sun's come to mind -- there is no "off" switch; control
> of the mike is entirely up to the software.)

Pardon me, but I'm using a Sun SPARCstation IPX right now.  The
microphone has an "on/off" switch right on it.  Several of the mics
here are dead because leaving it on too long drains the battery.

I'm a bit surprised that Jerry didn't mention the "infinity"
transmitter bug that was once used in phones.  That's the only factual
case of forcing a phone off-hook (except for the answering machines
that have the 'monitor' feature).

I personally see the Caller-ID situation as mostly moot and refuse to
get agitated about it.  I have Caller-ID and most of the calls are
still out-of-area.  I agree that once SS7 connectivity really picks up
and more and more number get identified, it'll be a useful service and
the time to have considered its ramifications was during the phase in
and implementation.

But the argument/debate seems irreconciliable and that's why it has
its own discussion group.  Pat, why don't you just shunt that traffic
to the TELECOM-PRIV list ([e-mail])?


 Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Good idea. I do think Telecom-Privacy is a better
list for an ongoing discussion of this issue than here. In fact, like
CuD which had its start here, the Telecom Privacy Digest was started
by Dennis Rears when he agreed to take a large overflow of CID messages
which were coming in here a couple years ago. The only thing is, no
matter much I keep shunting messages his way and telling people to use
that forum, they keep coming back here to the Digest. Lauren Weinstein
also has a Privacy Digest/mailing list, but I never hear much said
about it. Maybe he will write and promote it a little here.  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #424
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03645;
          27 Jun 93 15:34 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20738
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 21:02:35 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22962
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 21:02:02 -0500
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 21:02:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #423

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 25 Jun 93 21:02:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 423

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The EFF, CuD, and This Digest (TELECOM Moderator)
    "Fees" Hidden in Budget Will Cost You $$$$!! (San Jose Herald via W. Sohl)
    Features For AT&T's Easy Reach (Cris Pedregal-Martin)
    Affordable x25? (Alan Boritz)
    Long Distance Inquiry (Rich Greenberg)
    Modem Connections to Speedway.net (Bill Berbenich)
    Motorola Reprogramming Interface to Serial Port (Joe Smooth)
    Internet -> ATT Mail Delays (David Appell)
    Change T.30 T2 Timeout Time With Faxmodem (Rockwell Chipset)? (R. Bertram)
    Why -48V on Local Loop? (Yee-Lee Shyong)
    Alpha Pager Protocol Specifications (Tom Lowe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 17:07:26 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: The EFF, CuD, and This Digest


Word has reached me recently of changes -- either contemplated or
perhaps by now realized -- at the Electronic Frontier Foundation
regards what has been termed by some their 'sellout' to deep-pocketed
corporate patrons of the organization at the expense of the {Computer
Underground Digest}.

So the story goes -- and this is all heresay to me, no one has given
me anything official to print here -- 'some people' were unhappy with
EFF keeping CuD in the FTP directory; CuD has articles which offend
'some people', and apparently EFF needs the support (read money) from
those people more than it needs the aggravations caused by keeping an
e-journal enjoyed by people into hacking. So CuD was bounced.

I think that's a shame. Many readers know that {Computer Underground
Digest} had its origin right here in TELECOM Digest several years ago.
The volume of messages pertaining to social issues involving hacking
and the computer underground were overwhelming me. The publishers of
CuD approached me and asked 'if I would mind' them starting a mailing
list and funnelling all those messages along with future ones on the
topic through their site. I was more than pleased to go along with
their idea; thus CuD was started and has been a rousing success ever
since on the net. I wish that I had the time and resources available
to me to make TELECOM Digest as well-produced as CuD. I feel in many
respects like a fairly normal parent who gives birth to an extremely
gifted child. In a few short years, the child far surpasses the parent
in ability, creativeness and intelligence.

If EFF no longer wants CuD available in their archives, then I doubt
there is anything from TELECOM Digest they would want there either.

But more to the point of this commentary, I am more than a little
annoyed that what is considered good for the goose is apparently not
so good for the gander. When I belatedly realized several months ago
that my options with TELECOM Digest were to either begin selling some
affinity telecom services -- and at times simply ask for money -- or
else just close the whole thing down, one of my biggest detractors
was, and I assume still is, a staunch, very loyal and involved member
of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The complaints were several, but all variations on the same theme: the
abuse of the net by 'commercializing' the Digest. There would be, it
was said, censorship of messages by non-contributors (financial); it
would soon come to pass that the archives would no longer be available
unless you paid to use them; one erstwhile west coast affiliate flatly
declared the whole thing was fraudulent, and to this day he takes
great pains to let everyone know he is consulting with his banker to
be certain his money won't be ripped off, so 'particularly troublesome'
does he find the current state of affairs.

Like EFF, I've been approached by a couple large corporations. I've
been told there could be big money in it for me if I'd change my tune
a little. All I had to do was just 'edit things a little differently';
just spoon-feed it to the readers a little differently each day. The
readership changes here so greatly (mostly a constant increase of new
readers and occassional drops of old readers) that within a few months
all the newcomers in that period of time wouldn't know the difference.
To me, 'big money' would be if I could earn $20,000 per year and have
my rent and phone bill paid as it came due ... I don't know what 'big
money' means in the case of EFF, but I suspect it is a lot more.

Instead, I said no thanks, and continue to eat at McDonald's across
the street every day. I get by living on residuals and whatever else I
can put together. When Wanda, the manager here at the Metro Office
Building asks about the rent, I get the money somewhere to pay. Mean-
while the Digest continues to be free and the Archives remain available
 to all.

But enough of my problems. I just find it rather annoying that when I
admit that I worship at the First Church of the Federal Reserve
because my survival instincts tell me to do so, I get told what awful
crimes I have committed against the net ... but when EFF unabashedly
removes access in their archives to important and useful files (what a
couple people were *certain* I was going to do with TELECOM Digest)
because they want money from their corporate patrons, not a word is
heard in protest ... at least none that I have heard.

I'm not finding fault with EFF in this matter; they did what they felt
they had to do. They have a mission -- a job to do -- and it takes
money. They join me in worship at the altar of the Dollar Almighty.
Like certain bodily functions, we do things and avoid discussion of it
any more than necessary. Still, I am wondering where are all the
Socially Responsible users are now; the ones who spoke so strongly
against my heresy.  Perhaps they are busy penning missives to EFF,
using the same hateful, vitrolic phrases they used when writing me.


Patrick Townson

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: "Fees" Hidden in Budget Will Cost You $$$$!!
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 20:40:50 GMT


    Excerpted from {The San Jose Herald}.

BY ROBERT DOBSON
Herald Washington Bureau

     WASHINGTON - The Senate moved toward approving its version of
President's Clinton's budget package early this morning, a move that
is expected to set the stage for a showdown over "hidden taxes" and
spending in a House-Senate conference committee. At which time,
conservatives in the Senate say they will fight efforts to increase
taxes and spending which they say is hidden in the legislation.
Singled out was $60 million to be used to finance the National Data
Network that Vice-President Gore is a supporter of.

     The $60 million is to be raised by the imposition of a tax on the
manufacturers of telecommunications hardware and by fees on the users
of such equipment, known as modems. "We used the Pittman-Robertson
act, which finances conservation efforts through a tax on firearms and
ammunition, as a model," said Congressional spokesperson Bonnie Houck.
"The people purchasing and using this type of equipment are affluent
and well off. It's fair, it's not taxation, this is a progressive
measure that asks the users of a resource to pay for the costs of that
resource."

[deleted]

     Clinton Administration spokesperson J. R. Dobbs cautioned against
calling the fees a tax; "Inaccurate buzz words like `modem fees' and
allusions to `modem taxes' produce knee-jerk reactions that
short-circuit constructive inquiry into a vital public issue.
Telecommunications users from all sectors - educators, small business,
local governments, public service entities. liraries and recreational
users - should take strong interest in how the next generation of
telecommunications networks will be developed and financed.

     The newly authorized user fees are concealed in an obscure line
item (Docket 37-42 of the Data Communications Network Architecture, or
DCNA proposal), "the implications of which NO ONE at this time fully
understands," according to noted MIT communications policy expert
James Parry. These changes would require telecommunications users to
pay "usage sensitive" carrier charges.

[deleted]

     Roger Carasso is a special assistant to the chief of the Common
Carrier Bureau at the FCC. He said it made sense that someone using a
14,400 bps modem pay more than someone using a 2400 bps modem. He also
commented that it was good policy to have the fees collected by modem
manufacturers and the regional Bell operating companies (RBOC's).
"That way the users don't see the government involved in the same old
`tax and spend'. In this case the users can take pride in the fact
that they are, in fact, directly financing the new `data superhighway'
while, at the same time, freeing up scarce government resources for
truly necessary social programs such as Medicare, food stamps and
education."

[rest of article deleted]

           UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this
                IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED.


[Moderator's Note: Well I didn't vote for Hillary and her husband, so
don't blame me. You could try writing to '[e-mail]' to
express your displeasure, but I can't imagine it would do any good.
The above article will no doubt be in circulation on Compuserve, GEnie,
Delphi and the other commercial services in the next day or two with
exhortations from the proprietors to write in protest. A better solution
would be to get Clinton out of office in 1996 -- or sooner!   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Cris Pedregal-Martin)
Subject: Features For AT&T's Easy Reach
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 10:56:06 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Greetings,

I've been using my Easy Reach number for some time now.  My callers
have some difficulty reaching the 700 number sometimes, and I think
they shouldn't need to be very phone-literate to get through.  But if
I am a subscriber to 700, perhaps I can use some more features, and I
am sure they can be integrated so that you don't have to bother with
them if you don't want them. So, here are some ideas, and let's see
what other c.d.t. readers (and the technical staff at Ma) think.

Things I'd like to see added to the Easy Reach (tm) service:

a- When I get a call from abroad, there's always a short high pitched
beep.  I'd like a similar thing on Easy Reach, so I can tell the call
came through ER and not the regular number I happen to be at. It
should be possible to do this on my audio channel only, so the caller
doesn't hear it. Doesn't have to be more than a perhaps a two tone
beep or something like that, short and distinctive. Or perhaps, the
phrase "Easy-Reach", or "700-call", or whatever. There could be two or
three such signals, to distinguish whether it's a call paid by the
caller or the 700 number subscriber.  And the feature might be turned
off or on  -- some people may not like this --.

b- The forwarding could be more powerful (the usual tradeoff of
keeping it simple but powerful applies). Something I'd like is to be
able to specify a daily scheme, such as, 9-5 to my office number,
otherwise home, which would save two daily calls to set/clear it.

c- Having voicemail attached to the 700 number would be great.
(This hooks to (b).) The reps tell me that's in the works.

d- Being "easy-reachable" from abroad would be great too. I would be
happy if 700 numbers were reachable through USA-Direct.  Rates should
be the same for callers as to any US number with USA Direct, and if
reverse-billed, it should be possible to charge the 700-subscriber
even less than that, though perhaps more than a direct-dialed outward
call.  Here it'd be essential to have the feature in (a) above.  Or
don't allow reverse billing from abroad to avoid hassles.  Reps tell
me that international access is also in the works.

e- Reaching ER should be easier too.  Often times 0700 or 102880700
doesn't go through in payphones and of course PBXs.  Yes, you can get
to it through 1-800-3210ATT and another specific ER number, but how
about an access 800 number just for that?  Something such as 1-800-
CALL-700 and then you are prompted for the remaining seven digits.

f- The prompts for callers should be selectable by the subscriber, at
least allowing them in various languages. (e.g., I should be able to
have my prompts in say German).


Cris Pedregal Martin          [e-mail]
Computer Science Department   UMass / Amherst, MA 01003

------------------------------

Date: 25 Jun 93 07:37:13 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Affordable x25?


A friend has been trying to reach the International Computing Center
in Geneva, from his system in Bloomfield, New Jersey, but for some
reason he can't establish a direct dial connection (country code 41).
The ICC has ports available through Telenet/Sprintnet and Tymnet, but
the cost appears to be prohibitive (a caller needs a pre-paid
connection, since they don't accept collect c.25 calls).

Someone at Telenet told him, "64k is a LOT of data," ;) and quoted an
equivalent k/s (kilo-segment) price that came to about $200/meg to
transfer data across the network (at relatively slow x.25 speed).  He
was quoted a similar rate (don't have it handy, though) for Tymnet.
With prices like that, I can't think of any reason to use these
networks unless if someone held a gun to my head.  Are Sprintnet and
Tymnet intentionally trying to price themselves out of existance, or
just totally ignorant?  Is direct dial, through the public-switched
voice network, the most cost-effective way to reach Switzerland?


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 09:15:33 PDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Long Distance Inquiry


The company I am presently working for has its computer center in
Southern California.  One of the developers is located in Kitchener,
Ontario, Canada (519-886-....). He presently dials an 800 number
which connects to the computer.

He is logged on around 120 hrs/month, at a cost to us of $1500-1800 a
month.  (Aprox $0.25/minute in US dollars). His requirement is a voice
grade line that will handle 14.4 bps v.32bis, with a possibility of
upgrading to v.fast someday.

I have looked into the following and rejected all because of costs:

 1) Putting us "on the internet" and having him come in by logging
 on to a public access site thats a local call from him and using
tn3270.  The site near him that I found (Uunet Canada) charges $6/hr
connect, unlike the one I use (Netcom) which charges only a fixed
monthly cost with no connect charges.

 2) Connecting us to Tymnet or Sprintnet and having him come in
 by dialing a local access number.

 3) A leased line to him.  If he was 50 miles south over the US
border, this would be the way to go.  My boss looked into this
earlier, and it turns out that the link from the border to
 Kitchener would cost several times the link from SoCal to the
border. The nearest USA point would likely be either Buffalo, NY
 or Detroit, MI.

Suggestions?  Someone mentioned American Satelite, but I don't know
where they are or how to contact them.  Our financial requirements
would need a significant monthly savings, and if there are any startup
costs, no more than six to nine months payback.


Rich Greenberg             Work: ETi Solutions, Oceanside CA 619-631-5280
N6LRT    TinselTown, USA   Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
I speak for myself only.

------------------------------

Subject: Modem Connections to Speedway.net
From: [e-mail] (Bill Berbenich)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 14:25:09 EDT
Organization: The Home for Homeless Homing Pigeons


   I figured this is as good a place as any to ask my question, as
this is where I first learned of speedway.net and their service.  I
contacted them to set up a UUCP connection and got that part of things
worked through just fine, but once I started polling speedway I
noticed problems.

   The problems I noticed is that no matter which (or two) modems that
I used to poll speedway (one Telebit, the other Hayes - both v.32bis
and v.42/42bis), I would constantly get retrains and that the
throughput was terrible as a result.  This problem seemed to happen at
all times of the day, no matter when I polled.

   [e-mail] told me in so many words "it isn't our
problem."  Now to my question -- who else has had this problem in
connecting to speedway.net?

   Please e-mail replies directly to me.  I will summarize here if it
is warranted, based upon the replies I receive.  Thanks.


Bill

     ---+++ Wabworld, Ltd. +++---
       [e-mail]
       bangpath - wabwrld!bill

------------------------------

From: Joe Smooth <[e-mail]>
Subject: Motorola Reprogramming Interface to Serial Port
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 21:40:20 GMT


 I was wondering if anybody has a schematic or an actual interface to
connect a Motorola (Bravo Express?) pager to the serial port of a
computer for reprogramming purposes. I know it is possible to do (with
the correct software, of course), but I still need the interface, and
have no idea wha pins go to what, etc. If anybody can help me out, I'd
appreciate it! Thanks.

------------------------------

Date: Fri 25 Jun 1993 18:10:17 -0600
From: David Appell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays


   Since last year I have been experiencing significant delays on mail
delivered from the Internet to my ATTmail account.  Delays of six
hours are normal, and 24 hours or more is not unheard of.  (During
this time, mail that I have received at either an MCI Mail account or
PSI Link has always been received promptly, usually within an hour.)
It's gotten so bad that their product is, I now feel, hardly useable.
ATTmail Help has not been helpful, either blaming the problem on the
Internet, or saying there was nothing they could do.  I've recently
tried to escalate the problem to their management, but they have
refused to provide these names.

 Two questions:

   (1) has anyone else been experiencing this problem?

   (2) can anyone provide the names of the Product Manager of ATTmail,
        or the Vice President of AT&T EasyLink Services?

Thanks.


 David Appell   [e-mail]    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Reinhard Bertram)
Subject: Change T.30 T2 Timeout Time With Faxmodem (Rockwell Chipset)?
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 10:36:05 +0200
Organization: sountec


I'm looking for a way to lenghten the T.30 T2 timeout.

Let me describe my problem:

I use a Quicktel 14400XV which has the Rockwell RC144AC chipset
inside.  Firmware I use is 1.70b. I'm having big problems with one
specific fax machine, which seems to take longer for sending the fax
data stream then my modem is going to allow, so I always get +FHNG:73
error when I try to send a fax to them. The fax machine is a SEL 3650.

I can't find any +F command which allows setting of this time. Maybe
there is an undocumented command, or maybe there is any S register
setting, which changes this time. If yes this would be the easiest
way. If not, how is this time stored? Just in the firmware, or
hardware specific and if hardware specific is it calculated digital or
analog (maybe by filling up a capacitor)?

Any help would be greatly appreciated, because this machine is the one
I need to fax to most often.


Reinhard Bertram       voice: [phone] | cis  : 100031,1704
Oberendstrasse 25      fax  : [phone]  | btx  : 060782390
D-64823 Gross-Umstadt  email: [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 10:04:05 CST
From: [e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong)
Subject: Why -48V on Local Loop?


When I read the articles about telephony, they all said that the
voltage used on subscriber is -48V. But from the viewpoint of power,
it's not very economical for system. Does anyone know the reason why
telephone company chose the value as standard? I think that -10V is
enough to drive a telephone line.


Thanks!

Apollo SHyong

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 23:06:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Alpha Pager Protocol Specifications


I have a paper copy of the "Telocator Alphanumeric Protocol".

(From the cover letter:)

"This protocol is typically used for the input of numeric,
alphanumeric, or tone only pages sent from a computer device to a
central paging terminal.  These systems use an autodialer and a Bell
103 modem."

(And so forth)

There are eleven pages to the entire document.  More than I have time
to type in myself.  If there is anyone out there who would be able to
type up the document (or part of it), I would be willing to fax a copy
to you.

Unfortunately, I can't afford to fax it to everyone who will want a
copy.  If you are desperate for the document, send me email and plead
your case.

Alternatively, or in addition, maybe someone out there has a faxback
system running that they would be willing to put this document on.
Any other ideas?


Tom Lowe    [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #423
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03664;
          27 Jun 93 15:35 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06836
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 17:52:48 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01270
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 25 Jun 1993 17:52:03 -0500
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 17:52:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #422

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 25 Jun 93 17:52:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 422

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911? (Greg Abbott)
    Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911? (Gordon Hlavenka)
    Re: Germany: Collect Calls Are Back!! (Mike King)
    Re: Advantages of Pre-Pay Phone Cards (Jim Gottlieb)
    Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards (Jim Gottlieb)
    Re: DTMF Driven Answering Machines (Pieter C. Filius)
    Re: What Switch is in Use in My Area? (William D. Bauserman)
    Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID (Justin Greene)
    Re: Advice on Voice Processing Card (David Herron)
    Re: I Guess There Really /is/ No Difference ... (Ray Normandeau)
    Re: Traffic Chokes for High Volume Subscribers (Mike King)
    Re: New House and Telephone Connection (Paul Robinson)
    Re: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles (Paul Robinson)
    Voice Mail Problem - No or Delayed Notification (Keith Gregoire)
    Re: All IXCs Must File Tariffs; What it Means (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Range Enhancement for Tropez 900DX (Marc Unangst)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu 24 Jun 1993 22:03:16 CST
From: Greg Abbott <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911?


[e-mail] (John Holman) wrote:

> I thought that I had a pretty good handle on cordless telephone
> features until last Friday night.  As I was watching some late night
> TV last Friday a police officer came to my door to enquire about the
> house next door.  He said he was responding to a 911 call that
> appeared to have come from the house next door but no one was home.

<stuff deleted

> [Moderator's Note: We've discussed this here before.  I forget what
> the group consensus was regards the technical problem here. Anyone?

When I was a 9-1-1 operator I witnessed to this on two occasions and
since my promotion I've been told about atleast one more incident.
The way I understand it, the older style cordless phones (which
typically just dial pulse) would, when their batteries got low, go off
hook and start pulsing out the digit "1".  Some CO equipment counts
those at just the right rate and somehow decide that a 9 is the
desired character and then the next two 1's complete the number.
People are amazed when officers show up at their doors at 3 am asking
what the problem is.  I aquired a phone that actually had committed
this offense, but I was unable to duplicate the effect.  I gave the
phone to a friend of mine to see if he could figure out what made it
do this ... to my knowledge he never came up with anything.

It can be a real pain, but it's nothing like the kids who play with
the phone and dial 9-1-1 and sing, cuss and make rude noises into the
phone!  And when they hang up and you ring them back, they're parents
say that it couldn't possibly be their little darlings ... until you
play your call check back for them and they hear their little darling
whispering four letter words!


GREG ABBOTT    E-MAIL: [e-mail]   COMPUSERVE MAIL: 76046,3107
VOICE: 217/333-4348   METCAD   1905 E. MAIN ST. URBANA, IL  61801

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: Dead Cordless Dials 911?
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 04:34:41 GMT


The phone does not need to have 911 programmed as a speed dial.

What happens is that as the battery voltage begins to fall off, the
microprocessor in the phone goes into electronic convulsions: The
offhook relay begins to chatter.  This has the effect of pulse-dialing
random sequences.  And it's not too difficult to imagine the CO
interpretting those relay chatters as 911.  In fact, the phone
probably also dials 411 and 611 (appropriate!) as well but it is 911
that attracts attention to the situation.  Of course, it could dial
other things as well, like maybe 011-xxx ....  This could get
expensive!

My favorite story of this genre was the one where the rotting tomato
dripped onto the phone while the household was on vacation.


Gordon S. Hlavenka           [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 16:37:05 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Germany: Collect Calls Are Back!!


In TELECOM Digest, V13 #414, [e-mail] writes

>> What are typical operator charges in the US or elsewhere?

>> For calls within the U.S., they are usually about 22c/minute (USD
>> 0.22) for calls within a state, and up to 25c/minute for a call from
>> Washington, DC to Los Angeles, about 2500 miles.  At night, the rate
>> is about 10c per call.  This is AT&T's rate; Sprint or MCI will
>> usually beat it by 1c per minute or so.

> You left out the surcharge for Operator Services.  Any time you place
> an operator assisted call and talk to a live operator (not automatic
> credit card) the first three minutes of your call are billed at a
> higher rate that varies with the type of call, I think the first three
> minutes of a collect call run about $2.50 - $2.75 (I dont have a rate
> scale to check), additional minutes are billed at the same rate as
> direct dial.

> (This is also based on AT&Ts rate scale, but so are everybody else's
> rates ;-)

The minimum period is now a minute for domestic calls.  A surcharge
for operator assistance is added to the cost of the call.  A check
with the friendly AT&T operator revealed the charge is currently
$1.00.  I didn't inquire about charges for person-to-person calls,
however.

Your mileage may vary.


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 22:50 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Re: Advantages of Pre-pay Phone Cards
Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles


> Of course, there's the downside of pre-pay cards and Talk Tickets.
> Instead of cash being accepted everywhere, I'll soon have a card for
> the phone, a card for the cafeteria at work

That's already a problem in Japan.  Every train line and many stores
have their own cards.  There is also something called a "U-Card" (for
Universal Card I would presume) that is accepted by several merchants
including McDonalds, Baskin-Robbins, and some Coca-Cola vending
machines.  But I don't think this ever really caught on.

When Japanese friends say, "It sure would be nice to have only one
card", I point out that in America we do.  Visa and MasterCard.  One
card is all one needs.  It is accepted in almost every store and by
many machines.

But the biggest problem I see with these pre-paid magnetic cards is the
fraud potential.  I think it's crazy to leave the only record of the
account balance with the customer.  Imagine if your bank's only record
of your account balance was encoded on your ATM card.

Telephone card phraud has gotten so bad in Japan that most public
telephones no longer allow international calls.  NTT just announced
that they are trying to develop a new phone that can tell if one is
using an altered card.  But as long as all the information is encoded
on the card, I expect someone will be able to read it and then write
it to another card.

Walk through busy train stations or parks in Japan and you are
constantly besieged with offers of "telephone card?  telephone card?"
A card with value of 1000 yen will often be sold for 100 yen or less.


Jim Gottlieb
E-Mail: [e-mail]    In Japan: [e-mail]
V-Mail: [phone]   Fax: [phone]   Voice: 824-5454

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 22:55 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Re: Grocery Stores Accepting Credit Cards
Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles


In article <[e-mail]> you write:

>> We wouldn't need any of this funny business if stores were allowed to
>> charge more for credit card purchases.  It'd be easy for a computerized
>> store to charge exactly 2% more, and thus exactly recoup its costs.
>> But Congress in its all-seeing wisdom has passed a law against that
>> practice.

> I don't think there is any law against this -- it is the policy of the
> credit card companies

In California, it is a law.  This kind of special-interest legislation
really makes me mad.  If a merchant has higher costs on a credit card
transaction, he should be allowed to charge more.  But the banks
pushed through this law in order to not discourage card use.

Merchants get around it by offering a "cash discount" instead of a
credit card surcharge.  The fine print on ads often reads "All prices
reflect cash discount".


Jim Gottlieb
E-Mail: [e-mail]    In Japan: [e-mail]
V-Mail: [phone]   Fax: [phone]   Voice: 824-5454

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Pieter C. Filius)
Subject: Re: DTMF Driven Answering Machines
Date: 24 Jun 1993 19:34:16 +0200
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands


Monty Solomon <[e-mail]> writes:

>>> There is a switch on the side labeled 'REMOTE CODE' which has two
>>> positions, '2' and '8'.

>> At the risk of sounding flippant, I think that you will find that your
>> actual remote code IS either 2 or 8.

> No, the 2 or the 8 is the second digit of the two digit code.

Right you are, and still the security of this thing makes me giggle:

A mere DTMF speed-dial program dials the complete string:
(0212223242526272829208182838485868788898; 50 ms mark, 50 ms interval)
in 3.950, say four seconds. Since the code is to be entered during the
OGM, most of them are yours within one call.

I'd hate to have one.


Cheers,

Rowdy Blokland.

------------------------------

Date: 24 Jun 93 16:52:42-0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What Switch is in Use in My Area?


[Stuff deleted about call waiting and Pikesville, MD]

According to my CO Code list for VA (6-30-92) the Fairfax/Vienna area
is served by either 5E's or 1AESS's depending on the CO.

I show the following NXX's as being on a 5ESS:

    222,260,280,318,324,406,438,450,471,478,506,589,631,708,709
    713,733,742,757,802,803,818,834,904,968,993

For some reason Herndon is split between FX-VN and HERNDON so I only
showed those codes that C&P listed as FX-VN (Herndon is all 5E anyway).

The rest of the FX-VN codes are 1AESS:

    218,242,246,255,264,273,281,323,352,359,385,425,487,503,591
    620,648,691,715,758,764,934,938,978

Oh I did notice that they list Fox Mill Rd (RT 665) as both Herndon
and Fairfax-Vienna (Fox Mill is listed as a 1AESS).

I can't vouch that this is 100% correct but it was a year ago :)


Bill Bauserman    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Justin Greene)
Subject: Re: Call Forwarding and Caller-ID
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 21:56:01 GMT


It might be more difficult to prove that the call was forwarded than
you think.  Some local companies do not keep records of local
unmetered calls under five minutes long (like New York Telephone).
The call just increments a call counter.  The call from A to C and the
forward from C to B would be undocumented, only the CID box would show
a call occurred.  As for whether the telco keeps a record of the CID
variable (the number being forwarded to) after it has been removed or
changed), I doubt it.


Justin

------------------------------

From: David Herron <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Advice on Voice Processing Card
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Inc., Palo Alto, CA
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 23:36:44 GMT


> Can anyone suggest a good PC voice processing card. I am looking for a
> card that runs on a PC, low priced, reliable, has v-mail,fax-mail, DID
> and call dialing. I would appreciate anyone's feedback.

Ditto for me ... but I also need one with a programming library and/or
hardware programming information (to write a Unix or Linux driver for
it).

Has anybody done this?  Can they recommend something?


David

------------------------------

Subject: Re: I Guess There Really /is/ No Difference ...
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 23 Jun 93 19:25:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


> So I guess there really isn't a real difference, at least as far as
> the standard rate schedules go. It seems that the Big Three have
> decided that it's easier to compete on the add-ons and special
> savings plans, than on regular rates for ordinary customers.

I once dialed the same number in Chicago from NYC using three
different carriers (at least) during the same time period for a one
minute connection. The only carrier taht made a big difference was
Western Union, they charged a LOT more.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 08:12:22 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Traffic Chokes for High Volume Subscribers


In previous TELECOM Digests, people have written about whether or not
non-'radio stations' can get service through choke exchanges.

In the DC area, the choke exchange is 202-432.  TicketMaster is
reached at 202-432-SEAT.  In Baltimore, the choke exchange is 410-481,
and Ticketmaster is at 410-481-SEAT.


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 13:36:48 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: New House and Telephone Connection
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Thomas Hinders <[e-mail]>, writes:

> I'm moving into a new house, the telephone jacks (one per room)
> have their cable pulled to a common point in the basement.

> My question ... what is the "best" way to connect these jacks to
> the Telephone access box?  Should I, for example pull a single cable
> from the access box to the basemet to some sort of wiring/punch down
> block?

If you can't (or don't want to) run the wires onto the NIB, then that
is what you will have to do.  Radio Shack sells a device like what you
want; it's a splice block with screws on it, and it could be used for
multiple phone lines or for many pairs coming from a single point.
It's about $6.00 or so, and you will need enough wire to reach from
where ever you put this to the NIB, maybe two or three feet.  If it's
a new house, is there any way you can get them to run the NIB *into*
the basement?  That would probably make it easier.

> The Telephone Co "box" (I'm sure there is a more technical name
> for it) is a gray plastic box on the outside of the house.

Names I've seen used are DEMARC , "Network Interface Block" or NIB.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 13:45:02 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


[e-mail], writes:

> This feature, of course, is to prevent the "memory effect" from
> occuring. It also trickle-charges the battery after the green "full"
> light comes on.

Now this is an issue that has been written up both ways; some people
say the "memory effect" is an Urban Legend, and that it only happens
under laboratory conditions, and some people say it does happen in the
real world.  Does anyone know of this *really* happening?


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 15:30 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Keith Gregoire)
Subject: Voice Mail Problem - No or Delayed Notification


Our company has a small PC-based voice-mail system (AVT) with a
digital interface to our PBX (NT Meridian I).  This system was about
half the cost of the totally integrated Meridian Mail.  We
occasionally (> 0.01% of the time) have seen delayed notification or
non-delivery of messages.  This is not too bad, I figure, but when it
happens *at all* to our CFO or marketing people, they scream for a
fix.  Our PBX service provider tells us this happens with all voice
mail systems, that they all screw up in this regard about the same,
even the highly regarded Meridian Mail.

Anyone care to share their experiences with similar problems?  We may
be faced with purchasing another, possibly more expensive, product,
but I'd rather not change only to find the same or additional
problems.  In most respects, the AVT Voice Mail works very well.


Thanks,

Keith Gregoire     [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: All IXCs Must File Tariffs; What it Means
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 93 21:58:48 GMT


 From the {Washington Post} Business Section, Page D1, 22 June 1993:

> "MCI lost its appeal to the [US] Supreme Court of a lower court ruling
> that found the FCC had improperly dismissed a complaint by AT&T, which
> argued that all long-distance telephone companies should file their
> rates with the Commission.  The justices let stand the lower court
> ruling without comment."

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> Now what does this mean?

The MFJ requires "the dominant IXC" (i.e. AT&T) to file tarriffs for
all their services, including special discount deals to very large
customers. MCI and Sprint can offer discounts from their tarriffed
prices without filing. MCI and Sprint have been using the customer
profiles from these special tariff filings ("Tariff 12 schedules") to
determine how "firm/soft" ATT's pricing is. Some resellers have been
using these special profiles to obtain the same megadiscounts that the
big end-users were getting and then reselling them piecemeal.

AT&T requested a level playing field. The court decided to continue the
asymmetry.


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer    Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l    Telephone: [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083        TeleFAX:   [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Range Enhancement for Tropez 900DX
Date: 24 Jun 1993 20:08:16 -0400
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


[e-mail] (Mike Detlef) writes:

> Several weeks ago a thread appeared regarding 900 MHz cordless phones.
> Somebody mentioned attaching an external 900 Mhz ham radio antenna to
> the base unit on the Tropez 900 DX as a means to improve the range.

This will probably work, but I would be very cautious in doing so.
The Tropez is an FCC Part 15 device; Part 15 devices do not require
individual station licenses because they are of sufficiently low power
and propagation as to render interstation interference unlikely.  In
addition, a Part 15 device must not generate harmful interference to
other devices, and must accept any interference generated by other
devices.

However, the Part 15 type-acceptance is valid *only* for a specific
combination of transmitter, receiver, and antenna.  If you put a
900MHz ham radio antenna on the Tropez, you have just voided its Part
15 acceptance, and if you operate it with that antenna, you are
operating an unlicensed transmitter and can be fined by the FCC.  You
are also much more likely to interfere with other RF-using devices
(and maybe even some non-RF-using devices) when using the better
antenna, increasing the chances that someone will complain to the FCC.

There is an alternative.  If you have a valid ham radio license, you
can use the modified Tropez under that license, assuming the
frequencies used by the Tropez fall within the 900MHz ham radio
allocation.  (Hams, after all, *are* allowed to build their own
equipment and operate equipment that is not Part 15 type-accepted.)
There's a catch, though -- you need to operate according to the
limitations of the ham radio license, not according to the Part 15
license issued to the phone.  That means identifying your transmitter
every 10 minutes and not using obscene language, among other things.
The conversation would also fall under the third-party communication
rules if the other person isn't a ham, which raises all sorts of
issues about who you can and can't talk to.  (Some international calls
would be illegal, for example.)

Of course, chances are that you could get away with not id'ing,
cursing on the air, and things like that, since the 900MHz ham band is
relatively unpopulated in most areas.  (Actually, that is due mostly
to the rampant interference from all the Part 15 devices ...)
Remember, though, it's *your* license ...


Marc Unangst, N8VRH   [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #422
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21022;
          28 Jun 93 4:21 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20117
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 28 Jun 1993 01:57:32 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30529
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 28 Jun 1993 01:57:02 -0500
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 01:57:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #429

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 28 Jun 93 01:57:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 429

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Information on Fax Broadcast Services (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Interesting Uses To Justify Dialup Internet Connection (David McKellar)
    Re: Long Distance Inquiry (Tony Harminc)
    Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey (James Van Houten)
    Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology (Bob Larribeau)
    Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology (Jon Edelson)
    Re: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Vartec Telecom (B.J. Guillot)
    Re: Want Network Modeling Software (Kelly Breit)
    Re: Features For AT&T's Easy Reach (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Particularity of 555? (Brian T. Vita)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed in Digest (Brent Byer)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed in Digest (David Albert)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed in Digest (James Parry)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed in Digest (Phil Wherry)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 19:08:59 EDT
Subject: Re: Information on Fax Broadcast Services
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 15 Jun 93 02:52:34 GMT, [e-mail] said:

> I am looking for information on availability and pricing of commercial
> fax broadcast services.  The basic need is to get a 25 page document
> to several hundred fax numbers once a week, occasionally more often.
> It should arrive within a few hours of being sent (ie one dial-out fax
> line probably won't cut it :-)).

Talk to the people at AT&T EasyLink (the merger of Western Union and
AT&T Mail).  They have an enhanced fax service that will do what you
need.  You can send it from your AT&T Mail account, too.

I don't have the 800 number, but it should be listed with 800-555-1212.


Andy Sherman  Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David McKellar)
Subject: Re: Interesting Uses To Justify Dialup Internet Connection
Organization: Digital Media Networks
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 19:15:36 -0600


About a week ago I posted a query here asking folks if they could help
me justify the extra cost of getting dialup SLIP vs a plain login on
an Internet host.  I asked that the flood of resposes be mailed to so
I could sort it out and summarize.  Well, there was no flood. Only a
few kind folks replied.  I sent mail to all who replied but some
bounced so I'll thank you guys here -- thanks!  Here's the summary:

    - Multiple sessions are possible.

    - Archie/WWW-like applications are possible.

    - After FTP-ing a file you don't have to then transfer it
      (by Zmodem or something) back home.  A good point mentioned
      by a couple people.

    - One person suggested that I could setup an FTP-able archive
      if I wanted.  I'm not so sure about that.

    - Could have a nicer user interface.  Eg. MS Windows.

I'd be happy to get any more feedback on this.


D a v e     M c K e l l a r     d j m @ d m n t o r . U U C P

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 00:58:50 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Long Distance Inquiry
Reply-To: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>


> From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)

> The company I am presently working for has its computer center in
> Southern California.  One of the developers is located in Kitchener,
> Ontario, Canada (519-886-....). He presently dials an 800 number
> which connects to the computer.

> He is logged on around 120 hrs/month, at a cost to us of $1500-1800 a
> month.  (Aprox $0.25/minute in US dollars). His requirement is a voice
> grade line that will handle 14.4 bps v.32bis, with a possibility of
> upgrading to v.fast someday.

> I have looked into the following and rejected all because of costs:

> 1) Putting us "on the internet" and having him come in by logging
> on to a public access site thats a local call from him and using
> tn3270.  The site near him that I found (Uunet Canada) charges $6/hr
> connect, unlike the one I use (Netcom) which charges only a fixed
> monthly cost with no connect charges.

I believe uunet has a monthly maximun charge of something like CA$200
for connect time.

> 2) Connecting us to Tymnet or Sprintnet and having him come in
> by dialing a local access number.

I'm surprised this failed the cost test.  The connect time charge for
Datapac is only CA$2.40/hour or so, and the packet charges are large
but not ridiculous.  Your end could also be a dialin connection.  Did
you really do the numbers in detail ?

> 3) A leased line to him.  If he was 50 miles south over the US
> border, this would be the way to go.  My boss looked into this
> earlier, and it turns out that the link from the border to
> Kitchener would cost several times the link from SoCal to the
> border. The nearest USA point would likely be either Buffalo, NY
> or Detroit, MI.

I think you'll find that Kitchener is more like 75 miles from the
nearest US point (Niagara Falls, NY) as the crow flies, and a little
further as the phone wire is strung.  Detroit would be a good bit
further.

However your point is well taken: LD and leased line rates here are
outrageous compared to US rates.

Suggestions: look into lower cost Canadian LD carriers or resellers.
Does your developer have to use an 800 number?  Having him pay for the
calls directly might be cheaper.  It should be pretty easy to get 45%
off from an alternate carrier, if you have (say) > $100/month in LD
billing.  This already sounds cheaper than US$.25/minute in prime
time.

VSAT.  Last time I looked into this, 19.2 or 56 kbps service was
substantially cheaper than leased landline service for distances over
about 500 miles.  Kitchener and LA are about 2100 miles apart, so it's
a good bet.  When I looked into it a few years ago, there were no
domestic satellites with reliable coverage as far south as Long Beach
(where we had a branch).  But US satellites obviously cover that area,
and probably Kitchener too -- since Kitchener is far south of many
northern US points.  And Telesat has launched two new Anik birds since
then -- I think they have extended coverage.  Telesat is in Ottawa.
No connection with them, etc.


Tony Harminc

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (James Van Houten)
Subject: Re: 411 Danger in New Jersey
Date: 27 Jun 1993 01:49:30 -0400
Organization: Metropolitan Security Services, Inc, Ft. Washington, MD  USA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: ......
>> Centel here in the Chicago area has another pretty useless offering
>> called 'warm line'. Take your phone off hook and *do nothing*. After a
>> few seconds of time out, some preset number of your choice will be
>> dialed. I guess some people find it useful, but if I wanted a private
>> circuit ringdown, I would just order one; those start ringing immediatly
>> when they go off hook, not 10-15 seconds into a timeout.  I've never
>> seen anyone offer this except Centel here in our area.  PAT]

> Pat,

> About a year ago, I submitted an article to the Digest about the
> Siskayou Telephone Company in extremely northern California.  One of
> the special services that they offer is "Warm Line", defined just as
> you state.

> It seems to me that the service is useful for the infirm, who might have
> trouble dialing a number in an emergency.

> Hmmm ... I wonder if one could get Warm Line programmed to dial Operator?
> I also wonder if you can still order Manual Service (Number Please?)

Warm line could be useful to the infirm if it could be programmed to
dial 911.  It might be useful to all if it could be programmed to 911.
In my previous life with the Government there where phones set up at
PANIC phones.  If the phone was taken off hook alarms would sound.


James Van Houten and Assoc Consulting
Forestville, MD, USA / +1.202.672.6926

------------------------------

From: Bob Larribeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 23:09:18 -0700


> In <[e-mail]> Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
> writes:

>> That the mouthpiece is disconnected IS an accident of technology.

>> No such constraints exist today.  Certainly, an ISDN phone could
>> easily be set up to forward voice from the mouthpiece no matter what
>> the "switchhook" state is -- that's probably just a bit in the
>> software.

> In point of fact, in ISDN speakerphones the microphone is controlled
> from the switch (usually a PBX). You push the button to activate the
> speaker, this tells the switch, which in turn tells the microphone to
> turn on. Something about centralized architectures, I guess, but
> almost perfect for bugging. People I've asked about this explain that
> this is not a security risk because the little light on the
> speakerphone would also go on, and so people would know that their
> mike was live.  Uh-huh.

I spent a lot of years doing marketing and planning for Fujitsu's ISDN
phones for the 5ESS and DMS-100.  The speakerphone on these sets was
controlled locally in the phone itself.  There was not interchange
with the CO switch.

To be more direct, the comments in the above mail are wrong in my
experience.  I am not aware of any ISDN protocol that supports control
of the speakerphone from the switch.


Bob Larribeau   San Francisco

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jon Edelson)
Subject: Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 13:51:29 GMT


> In <[e-mail]> Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
> writes:

> In point of fact, in ISDN speakerphones the microphone is controlled
> from the switch (usually a PBX). You push the button to activate the
> speaker, this tells the switch, which in turn tells the microphone to
> turn on.

'taint a bug, it's a feature. :-) (Well if you can trust the switch).

At a hospital where I worked, they had a nifty intercom system.  If
you called another station, the speaker and the microphone at the
other station would be activated.  You could then ask for whomever you
wished to speak to, and they could just talk (shout) back at the
intercom, without pushing any buttons or lifting the switch-hook to
receive the call.  Ye olde security versus convenience debate, I
guess.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 10:20:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays
Organization: Penn State University


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Daniel K.  Cheng) says:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David
> Appell) writes:

>> Since last year I have been experiencing significant delays on mail
>> delivered from the Internet to my ATTmail account.  Delays of six
>> hours are normal, and 24 hours or more is not unheard of.  (During

It would appear to me that e-mail to attmail.com depends upon two "MX"
hosts.  Both of the MX hosts appear to be on the same network (looks
like a class C address).  Consequently assuming a router outage, or a
circuit failure, those two hosts that handle Mail eXchanges would be
unaccessible.

(Does the concept of Route Diversity mean anything here?)


Pete

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (B.J. Guillot)
Subject: Re: Vartec Telecom
Date: 27 Jun 1993 09:20 CDT
Organization: University of Houston


In article <[e-mail]>, Ken Jongsma <73115.1041@
CompuServe.COM> writes...

> It would appear that one of Judge Greene's visions has come true:
> Today in the mail, I received a letter from a company called VarTec
> Telecom.  They are a long distance reseller, but curiously enough,
> were not asking that I sign up as a dial 1 customer. Instead, they
> included a number of stickers with their 10XXX code (10811) and
> instructions on how to dial using this code.

> Their gimmick? They claim that every 10th call will be billed at .01
> for calls up to ten minutes.

I have been using Vartec for about a year now.  After about seven
months of use, they had a rep call me and ask me if I wanted to get
setup with Vartec as my long distance carrier in the normal way.
However, just about two weeks ago, AT&T sent me a check for $50, and
my parents, who pay for the lines, took that offer, :). I guess I'll
have to go back dialing 10-811. The only complaint I have by Vartec is
that your one penny call will always last "ten minutes" even if it was
only a one minute call.  I wish they would give you the true call length.


Regards,

B.J. Guillot ... Houston, Texas USA

------------------------------

Date: 27 Jun 93 13:31:22 EDT
From: Kelly Breit <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Want Network Modeling Software


> I am trying to find a software package for network modeling, which is
> capable of simulating computer LAN, WAN as well as large communication
> networks, and supplying data analysis tools. Do you have some informa-
> tion about such software packages?

I just completed a search for such packages and would be glad to share
additional information, however I need to know what type of platform
(Unix-HP, UNIX-Sun, Unix-other, DOS, Mac, DEC, etc.) you anticipate
running the software on. I was able to locate a variety of companies
with products ranging in price from ~$400 to ~$65,000 depending on the
platform and the types of modeling required.

Please post here or reply by e-mail to [e-mail] and I
will gladly provide further information. A place to start is with
CACI, they offer a variety of packages and services that may better
enable you to define your requirements. You may reach them at the
following:


CACI Products Company
3333 North Torrey Pines Court
La Jolla, CA 92037
[phone]   [phone] Fax


Kelly Breit    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 00:33:54 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Features For AT&T's Easy Reach
Reply-To: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>


> From: [e-mail] (Cris Pedregal-Martin)

> Things I'd like to see added to the Easy Reach (tm) service:

> a- When I get a call from abroad, there's always a short high pitched
> beep.  I'd like a similar thing on Easy Reach, so I can tell the call
> came through ER and not the regular number I happen to be at.

Almost certainly the beep on calls from abroad is a "bug not a feature".
I suspect it's a very short burst of the 2600 Hz that is still used on
MF trunks as a supervisory signal.

> d- Being "easy-reachable" from abroad would be great too.

The arrogance of a carrier that would introduce a range of subscriber
numbers that can be reached only from the USA evidently knows no
bounds.

> I would be happy if 700 numbers were reachable through USA-Direct.
> Rates should be the same for callers as to any US number with USA
> Direct, and if reverse-billed, it should be possible to charge the
> 700-subscriber even less than that, though perhaps more than a
> direct-dialed outward call.

Why on earth should callers from outside the USA be forced to use a
service that requires them to have an AT&T calling card (or make the
call chargeable to you)?  AT&T doesn't even offer USA Direct in
Canada or the other NANP countries outside the USA.  I know of no way
at all to call an Easy Reach (sic) number from Canada.

> e- Reaching ER should be easier too.

You said it!  This whole concept of making the 700 address space
carrier specific sounds like more or a mistake all the time.

And it brings up a more general issue: in countries that have LD
competition you can choose your own carrier within that country.  But
there is no general way to choose your carrier in the country you are
calling.  Rather, you are at the mercy of whatever agreements your
local carrier has reached with the foreign ones.  There should be a
syntax to specify (or default) a carrier for each segment of a call,
so for instance if I choose (say) Unitel as my default carrier within
Canada, I should be able to specify that Unitel hand my calls off to
(say) Sprint if I place a call to the US, rather than AT&T which would
be Unitel's choice.

Perhaps (in the NANP syntax) 10xxxx10yyyynational-number.


Tony Harminc

------------------------------

Date: 27 Jun 93 16:10:42 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Particularity of 555?


>   1-110-1010.  A perfectly reasonable phone number.

I'd like to make two points here:

1. We are dealing with a work of science fiction here.  Things are not
always logical.  Ever find plot holes in Star Trek?

2. Given that the number is supposed to be to a top secret installation,
isn't it possible that the US government would maintain a bank of illog-
ical non-standard phone numbers that would be unlikely to be hacked?

Since this novel occurred predivestiture, is it not possible that
Mother had set up a series of secret and perhaps illogical exchanges/
NPA's for the government?


Brian T. Vita   CSS, Inc.       CI$70702,2233


[Moderator's Note: I know that about thirty years ago here, we had no
such prefix as '920' ... but if you dialed 920-anything it would ring
a couple times and always be answered 'Kankakee Emergency Defense'. I
never had the nerve to ask them anything about what they did there.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 16:26:28 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Brent Byer)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed in Digest
Organization: Textware, Cambridge, MA


In article <[e-mail]> you write:

> [Virtual Moderator's Virtual Note: And you mean the Reverend Bob Dobbs
> is not a spokesperson for Billary, our resident president now in power?
                            ^^^^^^^
Pat,

I must ask you to correct your spelling here.
The proper spelling is Biliary.  (Look it up in a dictionary.)

Better still, give dual "credit" as:

   Bilious and Hilarious

Yours in jest,
  Brent Byer


[Moderator's Note: How about Hillbillary? My other favorite refers to
that great man in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Oral Roberts. Oral and his wife
Anal. In Clinton's case, I don't know if God will call him Home if he
can't raise the amount of money he wants, but I know it is likely the
electorate will send him home to Arkansas three and a half years from
now unless things change dramatically.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 16:33:53 EDT
From: [e-mail] (David Albert)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University


The tip-off of where this came from was the notice, Unaltered
reproduction etc. etc. is encouraged, complete with the capitalization
as given.  That is the trademark of R.L.McElwaine, creator of numerous
messages on subjects as diverse as the existence of a communist plot
to over- throw the government, the non-existence of the Holocaust, and
many others.


David Albert     Illegitimi non carborundum est.  [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 01:52:23 -0400
From: [e-mail] (James "Kibo" Parry)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!
Organization: Two rooms filled with typography, in downtown Boston


In article <[e-mail]> is written:

> Yeah, but take another look.  J.R. Dobbs?  The titular founder of the
> Church of the Subgenius?  James Parry?  Aka "Kibo", Usenet star?

I can personally vouch for all this being true.

>  understands," according to noted MIT communications policy expert
>  James Parry. These changes would require telecommunications users to
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Technically, I'm a communications enablement expert, not a policy
expert.  I'm in practice, not theory.

> Well, it looks like I was taken in also ... unless by the wildest of
> coincidence there are Mssrs. Dobbs, Parry and Carasso in the positions
> indicated above.

I don't know about Dobbs, but I had lunch with Carasso last week.  He
complained that the food wasn't spicy enough.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 15:55:16 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Phil Wherry)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!


Relax! It took me a while to realize that the message was a prank, but
it's not worth worrying about letting it through.  c.d.t still has the
highest signal/noise ratio of any group that I read.


Phillip Wherry      Member of the Technical Staff
The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA     [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #429
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22399;
          28 Jun 93 5:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11877
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 28 Jun 1993 02:44:36 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01339
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 28 Jun 1993 02:44:01 -0500
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 02:44:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #430

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 28 Jun 93 02:44:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 430

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Van Jacobson Talk Last Thursday (Garrett Wollman)
    The EFF Deserves Our *THANKS*! (Jim Thomas, CuD co-editor)
    NOKIA Problem (Ted Dodd)
    Meter Reading Question (Ted Dodd)
    Ficticious Numbers in Southern California (Paul Robinson)
    FCC Electronic Mail Address (Paul Robinson)
    On the Decline of Engineering Schools (Jamie Hanrahan)
    Help!! My Italian Phone Bill is $$$ (Long) (William Beer)
    Telecom in China (Laurence Chiu)
    For Sale: Cellular Phone (Tandy) (Frank Hoffmann)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
 All article submissions MUST be sent to our email address: telecom@eecs.
nwu.edu -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 15:44:47 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Van Jacobson Talk Last Thursday


Through the miracle of Internet multicast technology, I was able last
Thursday to virtually attend a talk given by Van Jacobson of Lawrence
Berkeley Labs.  One of the interesting sidelights of this talk was
Van's discussion of why there is no need for ATM, and I though TELECOM
Digest readers would be interested in what he had to say.  (ATM as in
Asynchronous Transfer Mode.)

For those few who don't know, Van Jacobson started his career as an
experimental physicist.  In the 1980s he started studying networks,
and his researches developed (with help from Mike Karels and Phil
Karn) the techniques that TCP now uses to attain high performance with
congestion control and avoidance.  The results of his latest research,
most notably the `vat' audioconferencing tool, are now developing into
the next great congestion problem in the Internet today.  (He has some
help from Ron Fredrick, author of the `nv' network video tool.)

Here is my recollection of what he had to say about why we don't need
ATM.  (These are my words, and if I misrepresent Van's views it's all
my fault.)

The problem that ATM is attempting to solve is that of running
high-speed real-time traffic over a large network.  Audio and video
are considered important traffic sources.  Now, in an ordinary
packet-switched network like today's Internet, packets can get pushed
around, delayed, reversed, duplicated, or even dropped as they are
forwarded through the network mesh.  Ideally, we would like to be able
to set things up so that every sender transmits in lock-step synchrony
so that there are never any collisions and no packets are ever delayed
or changed in order with respect to other packets.  Unfortunately,
this turns out to be computationally infeasible; this type of
distributed scheduling problem is NP-hard.

Now it is a common enough solution technique in Computer Science to
restrict the problem domain so that it is no longer so hard.  In the
case of ATM, the problem has been restricted so that all data is
transmitted in fixed-size cells, and various flow-control techniques
are the subject of much current network research.  This seems to take
care of that problem.

Jacobson's approach is much simpler.  First, he notes that memory
today costs $30 per megabyte.  This indicates to him that intelligence
in the receiver plus a sufficiently large buffer can be used to
resynchronize and reassemble incoming traffic, similar to how an IP
implementation reassembles fragmented packets.  If we are willing to
do this, then there is no longer any need for synchronization in the
network, and so we don't need fixed-size cells, either.  (As it
happens, the `vat' program transmits audio in 20-ms bursts -- about
160 bytes in the default 64-kbit PCM encoding -- and uses a 4 to 8-kb
reassembly and mixing buffer.)

ATM has some other problems.  It uses virtual circuits, which many
people believe make it less resistant to failure.  In many ways, this
reflects the telco origins of ATM and its application, B-ISDN.
Consider what happens when a telco switch fails: major catastrophe!
Now consider what happens when an Internet router fails: dynamic
routing and IP's trademark hop-by-hop forwarding quickly combine to
repair connectivity as much as possible.  (If someone were to
accidentally disconnect CNSS48 from the NSFnet, it is very unlikely
that most people in California would even notice.)  Unlike the phone
network, the global Internet is highly competitive, and consists of a
large number of independently-owned and -managed realms.  This has
certain implications for routing which are not yet well understood for
packet networks, never mind for circuit-switched networks.

Another problem is the question of one-to-many and many-to-many
communications.  These are hard to do efficiently in a virtual-circuit
environment, and require lots of extra (and sometimes expensive)
setup, as anyone who has ever placed a large conference call can tell
you.  Jacobson points out that the information needed to do multicast
IP routing is /exactly the same/ as the information needed to do
unicast IP routing, whether you do distance-vector, link-state, or
some exotic map-distribution scheme that only Noel Chiappa
understands.  As a result, multicast routing is both easy and cheap to
do over IP.

The final problem is that ATM isn't here yet.  In order to do
real-time multimedia the ATM way, we would have to replace all our
LANs, all our routers, and all of our host software; many of these
elements still haven't been developed yet for ATM.  By contrast, the
PARC Fourm videocast is itself a proof-by-example that we can do
real-time /today/, over the existing packet-switched, non-virtual-
circuit-based, non-synchronized IP network.  ATM simply doesn't buy
us anything over a scaled-up version of IP.

                       -------------

Van then went on to discuss his new model of communications, "light
weight sessions", and some of the more counter-intuitive ideas that
his research has brought to light.  (For example, video retransmission
requests should be sent to the whole multicast group rather than just
the video source.  This turns out to actually reduce traffic!)

These events are usually engineered and discussed on the MBONE mailing-
list.  Contact your local service provider for information on how to
subscribe.


Garrett A. Wollman  [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman     UVM disagrees.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 93 01:31 CDT
From: Jim Thomas <[e-mail]> ([e-mail])
Subject: The EFF Deserves Our *THANKS*!


Mitch Kapor's recent post should squelch the rumor that the CuD ftp
files will be removed from the EFF ftp site. Sadly, PHRACK will be
removed because of the costs incurred in making them available. Pat
Townson (who, readers may forget, is responsible for the genesis of
CuD) reminds us that ftp services are not actually free, and that
somebody, in this case EFF, ultimately foots the bill.

For those unfamiliar with the files in the /cud/pub directory (and,
for that matter Carl Kadie's pub/caf directory on the same site) may
not realize that CuDs and other E-'Zines are a small portion of the
files kept there and in the shadow ftp sites. We attempt to maintain a
comprehensive collection of research papers, articles, dissertations
and theses, laws, and other documents that have been valuable for
scholars, journalists, and others. Availability is made possible
because of the donation of system space by the EFF and the shadow
sites and by the donation of time by those (especially Brendan Kehoe)
who maintain them.

The sites are heavily utilized by the public, and we all tend to take
the efforts of the donors for granted. EFF has limited resources, and
their willingness to share some of them by providing the rest of us
with easier access to information is easily overlooked. Sometimes all
we have to offer in return is an enthusiastic *THANKS* for unrecognized
and occasionally unappreciated generosity.


Jim Thomas / CuD co-editor


[Moderator's Note: I also received mail from John Perry Barlow, one of
the founders of EFF today. He feels I owe EFF an apology for 'giving
wide credence and circulation to the rumor'. But the fact is, I did
not start the rumor, and I had seen it in two other places on the net
in recent days, plus the use of the phrase 'sellout' in connection
with EFF in a recent issue of CuD. And nowhere did I see anything on
the net to the contrary from EFF. So I thought maybe it would be good
to get it out in the open; now the record has been set straight by
Mitch Kapor, here in the same publicaton where it was raised, and with
the reply from Mr. Kapor given the same prominence as the original. If
there was confusion caused by me, I apologize.    PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: NOKIA Problem
From: [e-mail] (Ted Dodd)
Date: 26 Jun 93 11:12:00 GMT
Organization: Ed Hopper's BBS - Berkeley Lake, GA - 404-446-9462
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ted Dodd)


I have a NOKIA C12 which is hardmounted in my 1987 Chevy Suburban.
The Burban is a diesel.  What occurs is that I must allow the diesel
glowplugs some time before I can crank the engine.  During this period
(approximately ten to twenty seconds) the cellular unit comes on.
When I crank the engine, the cellular goes off and I have to strike
the power switch to get it back on.  If the engine is warm and no glow
time is required, the cellular comes on when I crank.  It appears to
be the off time when I crank that causes the unit distraction.  My
installer says it is battery drop but the battery drop is the same if
glow time is used or not.  I feel his rocket science training was
inadequate.  Suggestions and recommendations are solicited.  BTW, I
have attempted to change the off delay time to no avail.


Ted B
Ed Hopper's BBS - ehbbs.com - Berkeley Lake (Atlanta), Georgia
USR/HST:404-446-9462 V.32bis:404-446-9465-Home of uuPCB Usenet for PC Board

------------------------------

Subject: Meter Reading Question
From: [e-mail] (Ted Dodd)
Date: 27 Jun 93 11:11:00 GMT
Organization: Ed Hopper's BBS - Berkeley Lake, GA - 404-446-9462
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ted Dodd)


How does a meter reading scheme that uses dialup phone technology
work?  It apparently calls the meter on the same line used by the
customer and does this at 0200 without ringing the phone.  Please
explain.


Ted B
Ed Hopper's BBS - ehbbs.com - Berkeley Lake (Atlanta), Georgia
USR/HST:404-446-9462 V.32bis:404-446-9465-Home of uuPCB Usenet for PC Board

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 11:39:23 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Ficticious numbers in S. Cal
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Generally, 555-xxxx is used for ficticious numbers, but not always.

I used to live in Long Beach, in Southern California.  An associate of
mine told me -- oh, about ten years ago -- about a "ficticious number"
series used quite extensively in Southern California.  I think mostly
(then) Pacific Telephone was using it, but GTE may also have been.

Whether they did this for the benefit of Hollywood or not, I'm not sure,
but in essence, it consisted of phone numbers in the series XXX-1XXX being
left as unassigned, inoperative or test numbers, where XXX is the same
code.  For example, a number like 310-462-1462 would be a test number in
the Los Angeles area.  (It still is; I called it and checked; it rings
then goes busy).

This practice goes back a lot further -- 30 years or more -- because
in an episode of "Adam 12" a man is stopped by the police and asked
for his phone number, and in the show he gave out one of these
xxx-1xxx numbers, (which you wouldn't realize the significance if you
didn't know.)


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: We have, or had, a bunch of those xxx-1xxx type
numbers here in Chicago; always for testing of some kind.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 12:09:13 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: FCC Electronic Mail Address
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


While looking for something else, I discovered an E-Mail address for
the Federal Communications Commission.  While they may have it in
order to obtain a

       Telex Address:  6504426718

It is also reachable as an

       Internet Address: [e-mail]

I found it by accident while looking for something else.  The
following is the record from MCI Mail:


  Command: find name fcc
  MCI Mail Subscriber Information

       MCI ID   Name                       Organization    Location
       442-6718 Federal Communications Com FEDERALCOMMCOMM Washington, DC


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Jamie Hanrahan <[e-mail]>
Subject: On the Decline of Engineering Schools
Date: 27 Jun 93 16:35:00 PDT
Organization: Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego, CA


The following article recently appeared in sci.electronics:

My only comment (here; I had lots more to say in sci.e) is ... well, I
have three comments:

 - I guess the phone companies can stop worrying about the threat of
   phone hacks from MIT.

 - A degree from MIT must not mean what it used to.

 - Neither does a ham license.


Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego CA
Internet:  [e-mail] (JH645)  Uucp: uunet!cmkrnl!jeh  CIS: 74140,2055


(included text follows)

   Newsgroups: sci.electronics
   Subject: Re: Phone interface
   Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
   From: [e-mail] (Derek Atkins)
   Date: 27 Jun 1993 21:29:34 GMT
   References: <20htbb$[e-mail]>
   Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
   NNTP-Posting-Host: deathtongue.mit.edu
   In-reply-to: shane@sbpub4's message of 26 Jun 1993 16:26:19 GMT
   Lines: 25

In article <20htbb$[e-mail]> shane@sbpub4 (Shane Bouslough)
writes:

> I need to power a standard phone directly from a 9V battery
> in order to detect DTMF tones with a Motorola MC145436.

> Does anyone have a simple circuit which would allow me to
> connect the RJ11 to the Ain of the Moto part? I'm using the
> phone as an input device, and it will not be connected to
> regular CO lines.

> If this question is answered in the FAQ, don't hesitate to
> flame me mercilessly.

Please remember that a phone is designed to work with 48 volts, not
9 ... if you want a DTMF circuit off 9V, then I recommend creating one
yourself ... the phone probably wont work without a lot of hacking
around.


  Derek Atkins, MIT '93, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
     Secretary, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
           MIT Media Laboratory, Speech Research Group
           [e-mail]       PP-ASEL        N1NWH

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (William Beer)
Subject: Help!! My Italian Phone Bill is $$$ (Long)
Date: 27 Jun 1993 18:53:02 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


I am posting this to this group as I don't know what to do about my
ever increasing Italian telephone bill.

My problem started four months ago when I received a phone bill of
about 900.00 US which seemed strange when my bill is normally about
300.00.

This month it is about 600.00 (here we are billed every two months).

In Italy the bill that you receive only has a total list of "units"
used and does not indicate what numbers were called. So it is hard to
check and see if the total number of units is correct.

I have a "unit counter" (3.00 a month) which gives a non-official
reading and coresponds to the total units listed on the bill.

My question is therefore what could be the problem?

My theories:

I have call waiting (a new service in Italy) and have noticed that
sometimes when I change from one call to another I lose one of the
calls and when I hangup and redial the call that was lost the number
is busy and my friends tell me that they have waited for up to ten
minutes before hanging up themselves.  Could the call be still
"connected" and be costing me money?

Another possible problem could be my Sony cordless phone model number
SP-65 which has had a fair amount of interference lately.

I have asked the phone company for a bill with all calls listed but
this service will cost me about 0.30 US for every call made. (Can you
believe it!)

I hope that I have made myself clear and hope that someone can help me
as I am afraid that the State run Telcom keeps telling me that there
is nothing that they can do.

I might just have to take up Ham radio as a hobby!


Thanks,

William  [e-mail]
NCR Italy S.p.A.   MAILplus [e-mail]
V.le Cassala 22    UUCP ..!uunet!ncrcom!ncr-ita!ipa850!wbeer
20143 Milan Italy  TEL ++39-2-58.160.233 FAX ++39-2-58.160.854
                         VOICEplus 326-4233

------------------------------

Subject: Telecom in China
From: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Date: 27 Jun 93 21:39:00 GMT
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)


I just thought I would report some experiences I had calling Guangzhou
(aka Canton) China. While there are not technical difficulties making
the call (I use both MCI and AT&T) there are logistic difficulties
related to the lack of telephones in private houses.

My wife needs to call China occasionally to speak to her parents.
Since they don't have a phone we need to call a phone center which is
located near their house. This is basically a location with two
phones, one for outgoing calls and one for incoming. There is an
attendant 24 hrs/day and some helpers. We call the incoming number and
tell the attendant we wish to speak to a certain party. They dispatch
someone to the home and we call back later, usually 30 minutes or so.
The dispatcher gets paid a nominal amount.

While this works okay it's really expensive. Both AT&T and MCI charge
$5.57 (+/- 1c) for the first minute and $1.62 for subsequent ones. We
have to call minimally twice and the other night, we had to call four
times since there was some confusion over times (daylight saving or
not) and the ineptitude of the attendant who when asked if my inlaws
were there said no when they were. My inlaws could get a phone but 1)
the cost would be 3000 RMB (about US$300) to install 2) there would be
nobody to call apart from us!

This raises an interesting question. What if I pre-arranged that I
called p2p to that number and since my inlaws would not be present the
call would not be completed. But this would be a signal for someone to
go get them and I would direct dial 30" later. Is this unethical/illegal?
Note to MCI or AT&T staff reading this, I am forced to consider such
options thanks to your exorbitant rate structure.

BTW Call USA is effective from Guangzhou but those rates are pretty high
also -- $2.50 surcharge, $4.29 1st minute $2.19 for subsequent ones.


Laurence Chiu, Walnut Creek, CA
[e-mail]  <=== preferred e-mail address
The Transfer Station BBS [phone] & 837-5591 (V.32bis both lines)
Danville, California, USA. 1.5 GIG Files & FREE public Internet Access

------------------------------

From: Frank Hoffmann <[e-mail]>
Subject: For Sale: Cellular Phone (Tandy)
Date: 27 Jun 93 13:31:59 GMT
Organization: Siemens Nixdorf Informationssysteme AG, Paderborn, Germany


Hi Netters ...

We have a cellular phone for sale.

    Brand:  TANDY
    Model:  CT-350

    Misc:   Handheld portable phone with store for up to 48 numbers.
        Includes: Mobile cordless antenna (window mountable),
              operating instructions, charger and softbox.

    Date of purchase:  Around April, 10th 1993 in San Francisco
    Guarantee:         Still valid.


    Price at D.o.p.:   $ 477,--

    Our price:         $ 350,--
               ^^^^^^^^

We used it only a short time, because we were transferred to Europe on
short notice and we didn't know in April. Anyway it's in good
condition (at least it's nearly new!) and it worked fine for us.

So if you're interested in this ...


   Send me mail to:  [e-mail]


Kind regards,

PS: Thanks for NOT flaming ... :-)

Frank Hoffmann;Siemens Nixdorf Info-Systems;AP 52 DSSA;Fuerstenallee 7
33102 Paderborn;Germany;Email= US:[e-mail];!US:[e-mail]
UUCP: [e-mail]; Voice: [phone]; Fax: [phone]
Subnetwork-Controlling SNI Pdb-FuA [ap.pdb.sni.de] +++ [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #430
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08057;
          28 Jun 93 19:57 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31279
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 28 Jun 1993 17:32:34 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17310
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 28 Jun 1993 17:32:03 -0500
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 17:32:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #431

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 28 Jun 93 17:32:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 431

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: I Guess There Really /is/ No Difference ... (Justin Greene)
    Re: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles (Ron Oberman)
    Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology (Ron Oberman)
    Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed! (William H. Sohl)
    Re: 79th Street CO in New York, NY (Seth B. Rothenberg)
    Re: Telesleaze Goes International? (Miguel Cruz)
    Re: How to Tell What Phone Number is When I Can't Dial? (Bruce Taylor)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Affordable x25? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call (S Forrette)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call (M Solomon)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call (A Peterson)
    Re: Sir?  SIR??  How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI! (Ehud Gavron)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Justin Greene)
Subject: Re: I Guess There Really /is/ No Difference ...
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 16:50:59 GMT


There are a number of companies that cater to business clients that
can offer a substantial savings on day-rates, RCI, LCI, American Long
Lines, Cable & Wireless to name a few.  Though they want businesses,
they are not really concerned whether you work from home on a
residential line ;-).  Some offer flat fee service (I think RCI is
$0.13 min anywhere) but best of all they bill in 6sec increments.  You
would be amazed the amount of extra money spend rounding a 1.1 minute
call to 2 minutes.  Unfortunately many of these companies are not
available in many area's (like DENVER), so I have to take what I can
get.

For nighttime calling I usually use 10xxx and dial out over one of
the big three.  Their night rates are cheaper than my carriers (they
charge the same day or night.)


Justin

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NiCd Batteries and Discharge Cycles
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 03:02:54 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


In Article <[e-mail]> Alan Boritz <72446.461@Compu
Serve.COM> writes:

> Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Now this is an issue that has been written up both ways; some people
>> say the "memory effect" is an Urban Legend, and that it only happens
>> under laboratory conditions, and some people say it does happen in the
>> real world.  Does anyone know of this *really* happening?

> The "urban legend" comes from people who simply don't know, or don't
> have reason to care (no one buys battery analyzers for cordless phones
> and flashlights).  However people who earn their living with this
> equipment know the real story, and probably chuckle when they consider
> that they're part of the "legend." ;)

I continue to be amazed at the postings to a variety of groups on this
subject.

As to the "urban legend" status, Gould, one of the worlds largest
manufacturers of Ni-Cads has published extensive research clearly
showing the "memory effect" really does not exist. The papers have
been widely disseminated and, while I keep hearing reports that
"memory effect" exists, I have seen nothing nearly as convincing as
the Gould papers.

The Gould paper attributes the effect to over-charging of cells when
they are only partially discharged. And, of course, fully discharging
a multi-cell (>1.4V) Ni-Cad is about the easiest way to destroy it.

On the other hand, I am very weak in chemistry and in no position to
comment on the validity of the work in the papers. I just figure that
they should know a bit about the subject, especially since their
Ni-Cads have a lifetime warranty that does not have any requirements
for discharge of the cells between charging.

There have been several postings to rec.video by a Gould employee that
cite their research.


R. Kevin Oberman        Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: [e-mail]    [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 03:08:13 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


In Article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:

> Also, because government type acceptance is real pain, it is the most
> featureless ISDN phone imaginable running V1.7 firmware. Since it is
> unlikely AT&T will go through the hassle of getting type acceptance
> for newer units any time soon, I'm stuck with a brain-dead phone. :-(

Quick retraction time: Late Friday my 7506 phone was replaced by a
type accepted unit with V2.7. And I'm also told that a type accepted
7507 is now available.


R. Kevin Oberman    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: [e-mail]    [phone]
Disclaimer: Being a know-it-all isn't easy. It's especially tough when you
don't know that much. But I'll keep trying. (Both)

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Caution! Possible Prank Message Printed!
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 14:35:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail].
edu> writes:

> It appears we were the victim of a joke by our correspondent William Sohl.
> At least, that's the way it appears now.

> On Friday evening, I received and printed a message about a 'new modem
> tax' ... actually, 'user fees' proposed by our President.

> After the message had gone out to the net, I received the following
> reply which I though important enough to 'stop the presses' and send
> out as a special statement:

> Please read it, and draw your own conclusions. I would appreciate it
> if Mr. Sohl would explain *why* he sent this here without at least a
> tip off that it was supposed to be a joke -- that is, unless it is
> real, but the more I think about it, the less likely it is.

PAT, et al

If this was indeed a joke, then I too have been the victim of same.
Please believe me when I say I have far better things to do then to
propogate (deliberately) the old modem tax hysteria.  I saw the post
(it was cross posted in several other newsgroups) and forwarded the
copy to comp.dcom.telecom.  I had no reason to doubt the authenticity
of it, nor, from Pat's added comment, apparently did Pat.

Again, if this is a hoax, I apologize for allowing myself to become a
part of the originator's bad joke.

> And Bill Sohl, you should be *ashamed* of yourself!    :)

I think my comments above say it all.  I can't double check everything
before passing it on, and certainly the posted article I forwarded to
you had more than a credible appearance to it.


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Those things will happen. Don't worry about it. Even
a few readers here were taken in at first.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
Subject: Re: 79th Street CO in New York, NY
Date: 28 Jun 93 14:48:10 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Carl Moore)
writes:

> I called 212-327-9901 and got the following list of exchanges for,
> according to the recording, the 79th Street office:

> 249,434,452,535,628,639,650,746,771,861,879,988 but 327 (which would
> duplicate what is now 718-327 in Far Rockaway) is not included.

737 seems to be missing from that list.  That was my exchange when I
lived on 78th street.  My mother's business line in the same house was
on the 249 exchange, which I see listed.  Incidentally, I got my first
intro to telecom (at age 12) when I walked into that building and
asked if there was anyone who could give me a tour.  The guard found
someone to give me the tour (Alex Rempeneau -- anyone know him? :-) He
taught me about relays when I drew a system of magnets and switches
that could be triggered by a relay that he had that would not take the
line off-hook.  His post was at the 879 troubleshooting board.  It was
a mechanical switch -- very noisy!


Seth

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Miguel Cruz)
Subject: Re: Telesleaze Goes International?
Organization: /etc/organization
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 15:06:32 GMT


Thought people might find it interesting that there is one of those
bikini-style "Lonely? Want to make friends? HOT Friends?" type of ads
running on Australian late-night TV which gives a number to dial in,
of all places, Portugal. They break up the dialing sequence oddly (put
the spaces and dashes in the wrong places) so it's not immediately
clear (especially, I might suspect, to people who are lonely and want
to make HOT friends) that the call might well cost them more than a
simple trip to a neighborhood brothel (which appears to be a regrettably
convenient service here in Sydney).

Anyone else seen similarly absurd ads?


Miguel Cruz   National Computer Hotline
Sydney, Australia    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Bruce Taylor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How to Tell What Phone Number is When I Can't Dial?
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 11:56:01 -0400
Organization: Telecommunications, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Dave,

  While our Moderator is correct in some situations, I think that your
campus is like mine:

  We recently replaced the ringdown emergency phones with autodialer
sets.

  And yes, there were some 'wrong number' calls into the elevators,
until we got incoming service disabled for those lines.  You might
want to let your campus security or telecom folks know about the
incoming call to the emergency box.

(Then again, maybe we should have sold the elevator phone numbers to
telemarketing survey firms!  Big bucks for captive audiences.. ;-)


Bruce Taylor   ([e-mail])    [phone]
New Projects Coordinator, Telecommunications, Carnegie Mellon University


[Moderator's Note: I think things changed in the tariffs so that the
autodialer type connections (using actual phone lines on each end
which can dial to each other) became less expensive in many applications.
Private Lines, or direct circuits are not as common as they used to be
for this reason.   PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 11:04:40 -0500
From: Martin McCormick <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
nz writes:

> I'm interested to know what people think is the future for ISDN?  Is
> this the "best since sliced bread", or are there other services around
> or coming out soon that will make it fade into the dimmed light of
> history?

    Many people believe that ISDN is a system whose time went
about five years before it came.  Something tells me that, in the
words of Mark Twain, reports of the demise of ISDN are greatly
exaggerated providing a couple of things happen:

    The people who make the business decisions at telephone
companies need to start thinking of ISDN as another form of POTS
rather than some marvelous new form of telecommunication.  If
anything, prices for ISDN should be lower in order to get the public,
both residential and business, used to buying and using ISDN
equipment.

    Why bother?  Here is the real reason why ISDN could still be
the telephone system of the future.  There has been lots of talk about
the wonders awaiting us when telephone companies began to replace the
copper pairs to our houses with fiber optics.  This is probably going
to happen sooner or later and when it does, the way our telephone
communicates with the world will have to change, also.  It would seem
that ISDN would be a natural for inclusion on the bit stream to each
house or business.  It would be just another channel multiplexed on to
the fiber with the cable TV and Heaven-knows what else.

    ISDN, in and of itself, does not appear to be anything that
special, but it fits right in with the way the rest of communications
technology his heading and that, alone, is a good reason to promote it
as a desirable choice.

    I remember hearing a telecommunications-related program on
Radio Australia during the mid eighties that discussed ISDN and
mentioned a couple of cleaver acronyms for it.  If you are a
telecommunications provider, it stands for "I Smell Dollars, Now."  If
you are a customer, ISDN stands for "Innovations Subscribers Don't
Need."


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Affordable x25?
Date: 28 Jun 1993 08:17:57 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Alan Boritz) writes:

> A friend has been trying to reach the International Computing Center
> n Geneva, from his system in Bloomfield, New Jersey

> Someone at Telenet told him, "64k is a LOT of data," ;) and quoted an
> equivalent k/s (kilo-segment) price that came to about $200/meg to
> transfer data across the network (at relatively slow x.25 speed).  He
> was quoted a similar rate (don't have it handy, though) for Tymnet.
> With prices like that, I can't think of any reason to use these
> networks unless if someone held a gun to my head.  Are Sprintnet and
> Tymnet intentionally trying to price themselves out of existance, or
> just totally ignorant?  Is direct dial, through the public-switched
> voice network, the most cost-effective way to reach Switzerland?

It sounds like what you're trying to do is transfer a file from one
location to another.  When looking at the pricing of the X.25
networks, you need to consider that they are primarily designed for
interactive terminal sessions, especially in pricing.  Consider the
case where you have someone logged in to a remote host, entering or
retrieving data on a block-mode terminal.  They might fill in a full
screen of data, then transmit it to the remote host.  Or, perhaps they
send an account lookup transaction, and get a screenful of account
data back.  In these cases, the amount of data actually transmitted
isn't much, but there needs to be a constant connection with the
remote host.  In applications such as this, since you are charged by
the x.25 network primarily for the amount of data sent and not by
connect time, it is by far cheaper than paying for a direct-dial
connection, where you pay for a continuous 64kbps connection even
though it is idle most of the time.  So, it depends on your
application - for yours, a direct-dial connection may indeed be the
most cost effective.  I don't think the x.25 networks are going after
the market segment you're in.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
Date: 28 Jun 1993 07:53:29 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


Regarding AT&T's new method of processing collect calls, this was
implemented as a labor-saving device.  When you 0+ the call, either a
live operator or the speech recognition computer determines that you
want to make a "collect" call, then the call is released into the
network with no operator on the line.  When the call is answered, an
available operator is connected to the line with an indication on her
screen that it's a collect call, and she handles the name collection
and authorization at this point.  This way, no operator is needed on
the line while the call is ringing, and if the number is busy or is a
bad number, no operator is needed at all.  It may seem like they're
just saving a few seconds, but if you consider that they can cut the
total operator time on each collect call by 50%, that it turns out to
be a major cost savings for AT&T.

IMHO, this is an example of a "good" implementation of automation: the
amount of labor used is reduced by using a computer to do something it
can do well (i.e. just sit on the line until the call is answered,
doing nothing), while still having the benefit of a human interact
with the called party and determining whether or not the charges are
accepted, rather than using speech recognition at this point, which
would be prone to errors.  If only all automation efforts worked this
well ...


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1993 19:57:58 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?


> You mean they still use human being for collect calls? Here in NET
> land we use a computer. When you place a 0+ call and don't dial a
> calling card number within a set period of time, the computer comes on
> and asks if you'd like to make a collect call. If you answer yes, it
> asks you for your name and then proceeds to call the other party and
> states:

> "I have a collect call from {your_name}, if you wish to accept the
> call please say yes, if not, hang up."

> So far it seems to be working out without any major flaws.

My NET (New England Telephone) business office plays a recording when
their lines are busy.  At the end of the recording they state
something like "Operator, we accept collect calls."  They never say
the word 'yes' during the recording and the automated system times out
by the time they get to where they state that they accept collect
calls.

The local AAA (American Automobile Association) also accepts collect
calls and states this on their recording.  They also don't use the
word 'yes' in their recording.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 12:12:32 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?


> You mean they still use human being for collect calls? Here in NET
> land we use a computer.

 From all of the descriptions, it sounds like it is a computer generated
request (wonder what the response would be to "Please reverse the charges."
etc. 8*). This leads to three further thoughts:

1) If the switch is now handling the transaction, can we expect a
reduction in collect charges since no Operator is involved? (Then
again Southern Bell still charges extra for TouchTone).

2) Does this violate current tariffs?

3) What are the defaults?

Anyone know?


Padgett

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ehud Gavron)
Subject: Re: Sir?  SIR??  How Rude and Presumptuous of MCI!
Date: 27 Jun 1993 22:19 MST
Organization: ACES Research Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Toby
Nixon) writes ...

> Has anyone else noticed in the new radio commercial "introducing"
> 1-800-COLLECT, that the operator answers the phone with this line:

> "1-800-COLLECT.  What number would you like to call collect, sir?"

> No pause, no listening to the caller first, just call them sir.  How
> do THEY know its a "sir" calling?

> Give me a break.  You'd think in this day and age they'd be a bit more
> sensitive to this kind of thing. What's DOUBLY surprising is that
> they've been playing this ad for several weeks now here in Seattle,
> and nobody from MCI has heard it, noticed the problem, and caused it
> to be replaced!

What's broken is the little-mindedness of people who are so
self-apologist they hunger to pre-apologize for pre-offending anyone
who might one day be offended, despite the fact that nobody is
offended, and clearly no offense is meant.

Give me a break.  Quit being politically correct, or sucking up to
rightwing feminist groups.


Ehud Gavron        (EG76)      [e-mail]


PS: MCI says "Proof black on white" but the small print says that it
all depends on tariff filing and acceptance.  What?  They've had since
1984 to save people money and now (1993) they need a new tariff to do
it?


[Moderator's Note: Well, I agree some feminists can be very extreme,
but I don't think it hurts to show a little bit of thoughtfulness and
courtesy when speaking to people you are in contact with for the first
(and perhaps only) time. A simple change of opening phrases would
offend no one and would please many others. Anyway, I doubt that MCI
told the operator to say 'sir' ... that was probably just the operator's
response. I'm sure MCI does not set out specifically to offend.  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #431
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09268;
          28 Jun 93 21:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26243
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 28 Jun 1993 18:54:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30964
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 28 Jun 1993 18:54:01 -0500
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 18:54:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #432

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 28 Jun 93 18:54:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 432

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Were You a Victim of 900 Abuse? (The Marauder)
    900 Service Provider Get Rich Scam? (George Wang)
    Lightning, EMP, and Terrorist's Latest EMP Toys (Robert Monaghan)
    Value Added Voice Services (Keith Laaks)
    Telecom Experience at a Military Base (Ken Weaverling)
    EEC Standard Telephone Codes (Luca Parisi)
    New Radio Program and ANI Readback Number (Will Martin)
    Diodes and Dialing (Martin McCormick)
    Coin Refund Required ... NOT! (Paul Robinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Were You a Victim of 900 Abuse?
From: [e-mail] (The Marauder)
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 02:38:16 EDT
Organization: [Phantom Access] / the MindVox system


A few days ago there was a post relating to what kind of fraud could
occur on 900 dialups, and it reminded me of an experience we had back
in the mid 80's when we were trying to figure these things out.

The whole thing started when we decided it would be nifty to place an
emergency interrupt "live" on a nation wide radio call-in talk show.
We figured that the gang in the delay room would be so confused that
most of it would get on the air before they hit their mute, or
"emergency commercial insertion" button. The call in number to said
radio program was of course a 900.

We, being phone phreaks, realized that the 900 must translate to a
POTS number eventually, and figured it was probably handled in much
the same way a WATS (800) number was. Armed with this knowledge we
placed a call to "KC INWATS", who were fairly angry that we should be
calling them, but hinted that the RNOC(s) might hold an answer,
Arlington RNOC suggested we call ODAC (or was it the ONAC, I was
forever confusing the two), who really weren't sure either. (it was
ODAC who finally figured it out though, so thanks Hugh, wherever you
may be now!). Our next idea was to simply call one of the 900
dial-porn lines, claiming to be from repair and getting them to tell
us their POTS number, and then work our way back from the class five
office back into the toll network, and see if we could figure it out
that way.

Utilizing the infamous (504) DA positions "drop to dialtone" glitch,
we began placing calls to a few 900 dial-sex lines. It was here we
made a most "startling" discovery: It seemed that several of these
services would answer (return supervision/start billing), and then the
call distributor would route the chump caller to a recording of a
telephone Ringing! The ringing would continue for two or three
minutes, then simply disconnect. The unsuspecting caller would of
course call back again and again, and I suppose would eventually reach
one of the few "live" girls at the place (and thriftily start his
timer, to stay within his budget!).

Come the end of the month the poor sap would undoubtedly get a
gigantic phone bill for calls to the sex-o-phone, and would most
likely be far too embarrassed to make too much noise about it, and
simply pay ... "God forbid if the boss (or wife!) were to find out I
was calling these things, I'd best just pay, and try not to call so
often.  I could have sworn I only called three times that night?").  I
don't know if this kind of thing occurs anymore, but I'd be willing to
bet a set of 1AESS RC manuals it does ...

The people at "KC INWATS" were totally ruthless, and we never
successfully social engineered anything from those folks; in fact, it
seemed like no matter how "Legit" our supposed story sounded, we met
with the dreaded: "Who is this? -- you say you're calling from where" yow!).

Oh, and yes, we eventually pulled off the interrupt on the air.


The Marauder   Legion of Doom! (ret.)   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The only thing is, there seem to be very few of the
900 ==> POTS arrangements any longer. I guess there are some, but
people mostly have the lines brought into them on T-1 from the 900
carrier now-a-days unless they are a really small operator.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (George Wang)
Subject: 900 Service Provider Get Rich Scam?
Date: 28 Jun 1993 22:22:43 GMT
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Reply-To: [e-mail] (George Wang)


Does anyone know anything about these "service providers" that allow
one to get in with the big bucks of 900 numbers? I recently received a
mailing from PASE Corp. in North Aurora, IL which describes a scheme
to rack in big bucks without even maintaining your own 900 number.
PASE claims to do all the "work" for you. I've seen a late-night
info-commercial talking about 900 numbers but it seems to be a kit on
how to set up your own 900 number and NOT using an existing 900
service provider.

PASE wants $35 for an information kit describing their magical system.
Does anyone know how this all works? I've called the BBB in IL and
they told me they have a report written up on PASE but I need to send
in a SASE to get the report. Also called the IL Attorney General's
office and was told there were quite a number of complaints filed.
When I asked how many they couldn't tell me due to legal reasons.

It's amazing how hi-technology is being used as scam plans ...


Thanks in advance,

George Wang - Email: [e-mail]
STANDARD DISCLAIMER: All opinions and statements are mine only!


[Moderator's Note: What PASE does is sell you a highly detailed tutorial
on 900 service -- the kind of thing we have here for free -- and they
help you get an account established with a service bureau. I would not
say it is a total ripoff; unless a person is telecom-saavy like most
of our readers here, getting a 900 number established is not a real
easy task, and there are many pitfalls the average person is would not
be aware of. PASE seems to be interested mostly in the small (would be)
operators; the people who want a single 900 line extended to their
home where they then play a tape-recorded message to callers, or provide
some sort of counseling/consulting service, etc. PASE makes no claims
as to what volume of traffic or profit you will have on your 900 num-
ber; but they do point out that successful operators can make money. PASE
also can set you up with a 900 number where it terminates in voicemail
at the service bureau. You just use a regular phone (and number) to
call in to the service bureau voicemail to change your message and hear
your call stats. I've mentioned before that inter-telco billing is a
very technical area, and service bureaus --Integratel is a good example
of such a service -- are good for this reason. They save the small
time (or even medium size) 900 operators a lot of headaches and paper-
work by handling all the billing, chargebacks, etc. They navigate you
through the maze of technical and regulatory stuff. For this reason I
can't really fault PASE; for $35 they practically hand you a 900 number
established and ready to go. Your creativeness and ability to advertise
the number are the only issues remaining.

U nlike the big three in the industry, AT&T, MCI and Sprint who will
*NOT* extend billing and collection services to the three big, profitable
 'services' offered on 900 lines -- sex, religion and open chat --
most of the bureaus like PASE and Integretel will go along with what-
ever you put on your line as long as it is not too kinky, illegal or
obviously fraudulent. Avalon Communications in Ft. Lauderdale, FL will
put you in business with *three* 900 services -- 'Dateline', astrology
and sports -- for $99 in total. You need to nothing but advertise your
900 numbers; they provide all the data bases and messages, etc. You
call in to check the call count as you wish on a POTS line; commission
checks issued monthly. Call 800-945-6500, speak with Steve.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 15:25:27 CST
From: Robert Monaghan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Lightning, EMP, and Terrorist's Latest EMP Toys


I am sure all of us in the telecommunications industry will be glad to
learn that our tax dollars have been at work developing a non-nuclear
electro-magnetic pulse generator specifically designed to knock out
or destroy telecommunications centers and computer systems.  Even
better, the system is already so compact and portable that it is
implemented as a warhead on a cruise missile.

My reference is from AVIATION WEEK AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY of Feb. 23,
1993, pp. 20-22, by David Fulghum titled "ALCMS GIVEN NON-LETHAL ROLE"
(Air Launched Cruise Missile System).

The requisite technology is within the grasp of the average irate
telecom customer, consisting mainly of a coil surrounded by explosives
and a means to generate a current in the coil prior to detonating the
explosive.  Range is over 1,000 feet in the cruise missile test
version.  Of course, if you build one in a large plastic garbage can,
say, your mileage may vary.  Since the pulse rise times differ
radically from lightning and nuclear EMP rise times, the filters
deployed to protect against such transients are much, much less
effective against these new non-nuclear EMP pulses.

Regarding Jeffrey Jonas' question re: EMP protection circuits, such
EMP sensors are often designed into military systems which isolate
power supplies and inputs/outputs within the available 10 nanosecond
nuclear EMP pulse rise times.  That's 100 to 1000+ times faster rise
times than lightning. A typical high altitude 10 megaton burst at 300+
miles, say, would induce voltages of circa 30,000 to 50,000+
volts/meter of conductor at around 10,000 amps, give or take a bit
depending on your location and relation to the blast point. Since the
pulse widths are so short (100+ nanoseconds) the energy delivered is
small (a few joules to the typical consumer device or telephone), but
a joule is enough to destroy thousands of ICs when you are talking
about these kinds of pulses.  Now you have a better clue why certain
countries (N. Korea, Iran) are acquiring fractional orbit missiles and
nuclear warheads.  Even just one or two devices could convert the U.S.
into a third world country, stripped of its computers and telecom
electronic technology.

But thanks to our tax dollars, the technology to generate killer EMP
pulses is no longer out of the reach of the average techno-terrorist.
You no longer have to wait for nukes to make it to the military
surplus market either. You can get started today with all that wire
you have in the basement. Complete sets of plans will soon be
available from the usual sources (void() where prohibited by law).  In
the meantime, we will have to spend a few hundred billion dollarettes
in a futile attempt to secure our vital telecommunications and
computer systems from the effects of these devices, which will mean
lots of jobs for all those of us in the telecommunications industry
who dreamed up this threat in the first place. ( ;-) ) Don't you just
love how government "works"?

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Keith Laaks)
Subject: Value Added Voice Services
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 08:43:56 GMT
Organization: ITB Department, University of Potchefstroom


I am investigating the implementation of the following 'Value Added'
telephone services:

  1. Charge card (Automated Telephone Credit Card System)
  2. Voicemail
  3. Virtual Telephone
  4. Information Services (audiotext)

Any information which may help to answer the following questions, will
be highly appreciated.

1. When a client phones the Charge Card service, he/she has to key in
an ID number and password from a tone telephone. Handheld devices are
available that will intercept these tones and display the ID and
secret number. What stops people from obtaining a card-calling
client's information using this equipment and then to make calls which
will be billed to the unsuspecting client's account?

2. When making calls from some hotel rooms, all the numbers dialed are
intercepted, printed out, and used by hotel staff when calculating
your bill. When you dial the card-calling service, your ID (or
card-number) AND your secret number, is also printed out. Doesn't this
lead to fraud?

3. Some card-calling services require you to go via an operator if you
are phoning from abroad. This time you give all the required
information to the operator. Somebody (hotel or even telco staff)
could be listening in on the call and get hold of all your info. What
do service providers do to prevent these types of fraud?

4. What growth trends can be expected from these services. What
percentage of a country's population actually subscribes to the above
services. In which sectors of the economy are these services popular?
(i.e. Corporate, small business, home, wealthy, middle-class, etc.)

5. For voicemail, what is the traffic profile for message retrievals?
Do message retrievals follow the standard telephone traffic profile,
or do the majority of subscribers retrieve their messages early in the
morning, after lunch, and just before they leave the office in the
afternoon?

6. How is the Virtual Telephone service implemented? Do subscribers to
this service get just mailbox, or do they also have charge-card
facilities? In developing countries, where a large part of the
population does not have a telephone service, or cannot afford a full
telephone service, how popular is the Virtual Telephone service?

7. I will also welcome any information on the equipment used to
implement these services. What equipment is available to implement
voicemail (100 000 mailboxes), Charge-Card (70 000 clients) and
Audiotext. Can one machine provide all these services, or should each
service be implemented on a different platform?


Thanks,

Keith Laaks    Email : [e-mail]
Tel   : [phone]   POST: P.O.BOX 80561
Fax   : [phone]   DOORNPOORT  0017  South Africa
 Potch Univ.     Email :                 Tel:
 Potchefstroom   [e-mail]  Voice [phone]
 West Transvaal  South Africa            FAX   [phone]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 07:51:33 -0400
From: Ken Weaverling <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom Experience at a Military Base


Last month, I went on a week-long trip with a disabled couple on their
vacation. I was providing personal care to them (a side job of mine).
I also had to work my day job while on the trip, so I bought along a
modem and laptop so I could plug in and do work during the day.

During the trip, we had the opportunity to spend two nights at a
military hotel at Selfridge A.N.G. base near Detroit. One of the first
things I noticed upon arrival in the room was the phone handset
informed you that you were not to discuss classified information on
the phone, and that all phones were subject to being monitored (not
news I am sure, to those that spent time in the military).

After I got the couple to bed, I started to read the phone directory
for the base. Interesting stuff in there about the military phone
network, that you were to limit long distance calls to five minutes,
how to get approval to make them, etc. It also stated that "data"
calls were forbidden, but faxes were OK.

After getting the couple ready the next day, I returned to the room
ready to hanker down to some work. I figured I would just make my
modem call, because who really reads fine print anyway? I could just
claim ignorance if I was caught violating the "no data" rule.

I got my laptop out and disconnected the phone cord from the phone in
the room. I then plugged my laptop's modem into the wall jack. I
bought up my telecommunications program, and typed in the usual ATDT
command. I noticed that I didn't hear dial tone over the modem's
speaker.

But before I could do anything else, a loud and assertive knocking was
heard on the room's door. The person on the other side spoke in a
stern voice "This is the hotel manager."  I almost had a stroke.

I answered the door, and the person asked me if I had disconnected the
phone. I explained my reasons and was told that the simple act of
unplugging the phone from the modular wall jack caused an alarm to go
off on the phone console at the operator's desk.

I spoke in very disconnected sentences, none of which I can recall.
The "manager" left and I plugged the phone back into the wall and
didn't mess with it at all after that. I simply called work, told them
how to reach me, and worked "off-line" for the rest of the day!

I have no idea what happened, why unplugging the phone caused an alarm
to go off, nor why I didn't get dialtone. I had absolutely no desire
to explore the matter further.


Ken Weaverling,  Systems Administrator  Delaware Tech College   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Here's the scoop. The modular jack had two pairs on
it like most. One pair is used to operate the phone in the usual way.
The other pair functioned sort of like A/A1 leads to illuminate a lamp
on a key set elsewhere when the phone goes off hook; but in this case
the second pair probably completed a loop inside the phone which, when
when it went open (as it would do when the phone is unplugged) triggered
a rrelay somewhere downstairs which in turn caused an alarm to sound and/
or something to light up; thus the hotel management knew you had unplugged
the phone for 'some reason'; their experience in most cases was the guest
wplanned to steal the phone. Next time take along an acoustic modem or
one of the gizmos where you unscrew the mouthpiece and screw the modem
connector on there instead.  And remember, in many hotels or other places
where phones tend to get stolen, be sure that second pair (usually the
first and fourth/yellow and black wires) don't lose their continuity.  PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: EEC Standard Telephone Codes
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 14:43:08 CEST
From: Luca Parisi <[e-mail]>


In an answer to David Leibold, Richard Cox ([e-mail])
wrote in TELECOM 13.425:

> There is an EEC recommendation that there should be four "standard"
> telephone codes: 112 for emergency, 0 for national long distance,
> 00 for international, and 800 for freephone (or green numbers as the
> French call them !)

This is the situation in Rome, Italy: as you can see, the "recommend-
ation" is only partially met.

 Emergency:

    There are several numbers for emergency services.
    112 Gendarmerie (Carabinieri)
    113 Police (although used as generic Emergency)
    115 Fire Brigade
    116 Automobile Club
  There is a plan to have them converge eventually to a single number
  (118), which is already active in some areas.

 National LD: 0+
 International LD: 00+

 FreePhone (Green Number here too):

   Started as 1678-xxxxx, it is now 167-xxxxxx.
   1800 was used by Telco for an automated information service, and the
   whole setup required it to be a 1+ number (a special switch gets the
   call, queries the database and dials out the appropriate PSTN number
   according to calling location, time of day, etc.).

   Incidentally, the 900 services (chatlines, etc) will be 144-yy-xxxx,
   where "yy" identifies the per-minute cost. They are currently being
   experimented in Milan under the "Audiotel" name.


Best Regards,

Luca Parisi  <[e-mail]>

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 8:15:48 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Radio Program and ANI Readback Number


There is a new radio program about privacy and surveillance issues,
put out by the folks who produce {Full Disclosure} magazine, called
"Full Disclosure Live". It had been aired only on the Let's Talk Radio
satellite-broadcasting facility, and thus receivable only by people
with satellite dishes, but they have just begun broadcasting on WWCR
shortwave, on 7435 kHz, at 7 PM Sunday evenings Central Time. It is an
hour-long program, and I just lucked out and happened to catch its
first airing on Sunday, 27 June. WWCR has a good signal on 7435 kHz
and can be heard over most of North America and should reach Europe at
that time, too. (Of course, that's 0100 GMT, so much of Europe will be
asleep! :-)

They have a combination of discussions and listener call-ins, with the
call-in number being 708-838-3378. When I called, I got right in with
no delay. I caught a slight reference to the Internet later in the
program, but had had to switch radios before then and start doing
something else, and couldn't hear it clearly, so I can't say if they
had stated they were reachable via the Internet or what the reference
was.

They have an ANI-readback 800 number they advertised repeatedly during
the program: 800-235-1414. This is an ad for 1-900-STOPPER and for
{Full Disclosure} magazine, with an opportunity for you to leave your
name and address or a short message afterwards. When I called it from
home, it read back my correct home phone number, but calling it from
work through our PBX here at a federal office building makes it read
back a completely different number on another exchange. That number
returns a constant busy if I call it from here, even using another
line.

I don't think this ANI readback number has been mentioned on telecom
recently; I can't find any reference to it in Volume 13, at least.
So here is another resource for you.


Regards,

Will

------------------------------

Subject: Diodes and Dialing
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 13:10:38 -0500
From: Martin McCormick <[e-mail]>


    In an amusing previous posting, someone described how they
beat the restriction on out-bound calls by bypassing a diode which had
been placed in the telephone to block such calls.  I have heard of
this practice, before, and wonder exactly what the diode does to
disable dialing but still allow incoming calls.

    I don't remember if I have ever looked at the DC voltage
across the line during an incoming call, but I think that the DC
polarity of the voltage from our DMS100 switch is always the same.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 13:05:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Coin Refund Required ... NOT!
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> [Moderator's Note: Another curious thing about Wasbash was
> that the payphone operators could not *return* money deposited on
> calls ... operator would then say something like "Return on trunk
> 5076" ... a mistake and trip the collection table the wrong way ...
> Not to worry ... "Will you be trying the call again in a few
> minutes sir?" (yes)  "Then just tell the operator you have
> fifty-five cents credit coming from operator 479."

An item from "Steal This Book" discusses the tendency of phone
companies to mail refund claims of (small amounts) of lost money as it
was usually cheaper than investigating even if they got some false
claims.  I knew about it too as I would lose some money, not much,
maybe $1 or so a month from the crummy pay phones from GTE of
California and occasionally from wrong numbers or non-answered numbers
that supervised anyway.

Whenever I lost money in a GTE payphone, I *always* reported it; not
because I needed the money back all that badly, but because GTE placed
its coin refunds in these nice little cardboard coin carriers.  I
never bothered with Pacific Bell unless I'd lost more than 50c,
because they would send you a check for whatever was lost.  They had
preprinted checks in three colors with the words "MAXIMUM VALUE TEN
CENTS".

Anyway, the item from the book shows a photograph of Abbie Hoffman
speaking into a pay phone.  The caption reads, "Honest, operator, I just
deposited eighty-seven dollars in coins into the phone and ..."


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: For a few years, we got coins back in the mail
scotch-taped to a little card with a message of apology 'for the
inconvenience'.  Now we get coupons or pseudo-checks which can be
submitted with our phone bill for payment. AT&T sends these out also
with a line on them saying 'Pay to the order of the Telephone Company'
and you just put them in with your regular payment.   PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #432
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14085;
          30 Jun 93 0:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17180
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 29 Jun 1993 21:42:34 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28678
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 29 Jun 1993 21:41:51 -0500
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 21:41:51 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #433

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 29 Jun 93 21:41:50 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 433

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Wireless Data System Helps Catch Crooks (Roger Theriault)
    Ohio Bell ISDN Experience (Ken Hester )
    WATS Service in Oregon in 1989 (Mark Nichols)
    Teleconferencing For Small Business (Meera M. Blattner)
    Which Wires are Which in a Six-Pair? ([e-mail])
    Phone Theft Alarm (Ed Greenberg)
    411 Connections (Steve Edwards)
    Time to Process a Wiretap (Steve Edwards)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Roger Theriault)
Subject: Wireless Data System Helps Catch Crooks
Organization: Motorola, Wireless Data Group, Vancouver, CANADA
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 17:59:26 -0400



While this may be a PR bit, I'm sending this along as an illustration
and story of how our telecom technology has progressed. (NB: I didn't
write this) Anyone heard of any similar situations where our advancing
technology surprised the criminals (or was used by the crooks themselves?)


 Roger


 Pat Schod
Date: June 1, 1993   708/576-6612

 CADEC Systems, Inc.
Freda Counceller
812/988-2233


MOTOROLA'S COVERAGEPLUS(r) NATIONWIDE VEHICLE COMMUNICATIONS, LEADS
AUTHORITIES TO HIJACKED TRAILER.


     SCHAUMBURG, IL - Motorola's CoveragePLUS(r) communications
system, equipped with the new SensorPLUS(tm) vehicle monitor designed
by CADEC(r) Systems, recently helped authorities locate the exact spot
where truck hijacker-kidnapper suspects were unloading the trailer.

     "We wouldn't have caught them if it wasn't for the tracking
system," said Los Angeles County Sheriff's Lt. Jim Harris, head of
Cargo CATS (Criminal Apprehension Team), a multi-jurisdictional local,
state and federal police unit concentrating on full-load thefts in
Southern California.

     Harris said authorities took 11 suspects into custody and
recovered the entire load of goods that was enroute to its delivery in
the Los Angeles area.

     He said two gunmen hijacked the truck as it was leaving a loading
area in Ontario, about 40 miles east of Los Angeles, tied and blindfolded
 the husband-wife driver team and forced them into the sleeper section
in the rear of the semi's cab.  The man and woman, drivers for the
Phoenix based Swift Transportation Company, were later released
unharmed.

     Despite driving a circuitous 92 mile route, intended to confuse
the Swift Transportation drivers before they were released with their
tractor, regular transmissions from the vehicle's SensorPLUS monitor
tipped authorities to the location where the trailer had been dropped
off.

     "The truck had been stationary for a long time, so we figured
that was where they unhooked the trailer," Harris said.  The hijackers
drove the truck from Ontario into the Watts area of Los Angeles,
dropped off the trailer, then returned to Pomona, about 10 miles west
of the hijacking scene.  There they abandoned the tractor with the
driver team still in the bunk area.

     The Swift drivers freed themselves and notified local authorities.

     Harris said a record of the CoveragePLUS transmission during the
92 -mile trip led authorities to a pallet yard, where they found the
trailer hidden from view among tall stacks of wooden pallets.

     "It was well hidden," Harris said.  "No one would have noticed
it."  Harris and other members of the Cargo CATS moved in to arrest
the suspects while they were unloading the trailer.

     Two of the suspects were identified as the hijacker-kidnappers
and will face federal charges, Harris said.  Seven others are also
facing charges in connection with the theft.

    Swift Transportation Company, one of the largest truckload general
commodities carriers in the United States, has equipped its nearly
2000 truck fleet with the CoveragePLUS nationwide vehicle
communications system, along with the optional SensorPLUS vehicle
monitoring unit.  SensorPLUS monitors and instantaneously reports
vehicle stops, starts, idling, deviations in trip progress, speeding,
and vehicle diagnostics.  It also provides pinpoint vehicle locations.

     Dave Berry, vice president of Swift Transportation, likened the
CoveragePLUS messages to a "bread crumb trail."

      "We had messages that the truck was stopped, that it was moving
again, that it had stopped again," Berry said.  "Each message also
pinpointed the truck's location.  We even got a message through the
SensorPLUS unit that the truck was speeding.  From the messages, we
deduced where the trailer was dropped.

      Cargo CATS, now in its fourth year of operation, was the first
police unit in the country dedicated to solving truck hijackings and
other full-load thefts.

      The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is the host agency
for the unit, made up of investigators from the Sheriff's Department,
the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles Port Police, the
Vernon Police Department, the California Highway Patrol and the FBI
(Federal Bureau of Investigation).  Last year, Cargo CATS recovered
$28.8 million in stolen property.

     CoveragePLUS is the first wide-area vehicle communications system
to feature real-time voice and data communications along major
shipping routes and interstate highways as well as county and
regionalhighways.  With the CoveragePLUS system, trucking company
dispatcher scan instantly pinpoint the location of their trucks and
communicate with drivers via data or voice from coast to coast.
Motorola, headquartered in Schaumburg, Illinois, is one of the world's
leading providers of wireless communications and electronic equipment,
systems, components, and services for worldwide markets. Products
include two-way radios, pagers, personal communications systems,
cellular telephones and systems, discrete semiconductors and
integrated circuits, defense and aerospace electronics, automotive and
industrial electronics, computers, data communications and information
processing and handling equipment.

Motorola was a winner of the first Malcolm Baldrige National Quality
Award, in recognition of its superior company-wide management of
quality processes.

     CADEC Systems Inc., a division of Cummins Electronics Company,
Inc. designs, markets, and supports a series of onboard computers that
range from basic trip monitors to comprehensive systems.  These
systems function with all engine makes and models, and interface to
routing software, maintenance software, communications devices, and
hand-held computers.



    Motorola and CoveragePLUS are registered trademarks of Motorola,
Inc.  SensorPLUS is a trademark of Motorola, Inc.  CADEC is a regis-
tered trademark of CADEC Systems, Inc.

             --------  Supplementary Story -------


     LOS ANGELES -- It didn't take long for Brian Lee Taylor, a driver
for Phoenix-based Swift Transportation Company, to benefit from
Motorola's CoveragePLUS(r) communications system equipped with the new
SensorPLUS(tm) vehicle monitor designed by CADEC(r) Systems.

     Taylor, 33, and his wife Bonita were recently kidnapped at
gunpoint near Los Angeles, tied up, blindfolded and forced to lie in
the sleeper compartment in the rear of their tractor while two gunmen
took them on a 92-mile ride in and around the city.

     Although the roundabout trip was designed to confuse the Taylors
so they wouldn't know where their trailer loaded with merchandise was
dropped off, the CoveragePLUS and SensorPLUS units were not fooled.
Authorities were able to look over printed records of transmissions
from the units and pinpoint exactly where the truck stopped long
enough to release the trailer.

     "After all this, I really think it's great," Taylor said of
CoveragePLUS with SensorPLUS.  "It had just been installed, only about
two days before this happened."

     Taylor said he and his wife, Bonita, had just left a loading yard
in Ontario, about 40 miles east of Los Angeles, and had stopped to go
over their paperwork.  A man came up to the truck and asked
directions, which Taylor provided.

     "I was just starting to roll the window back up when they came
back on the truck with guns," Taylor said.  "I was worried, not so
much for myself but for my wife."

     As it turned out, Taylor and his wife were released unharmed,
after the armed men had taken them for the 92 mile ride and returned
to Pomona, about 10 miles west of the hijacking scene.

     "They had untied us and left us in the back (of the tractor),"
Taylor said.  "I waited about 15 minutes, then looked out and saw they
were gone."

     Taylor and his wife then called local police.


                     ----------------


Roger Theriault                Internet: [e-mail]
I am not a spokesman for Motorola or anyone else besides myself.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (khester )
Date: 29 Jun 93 13:45:10 GMT
Subject: Ohio Bell ISDN Experience


I am an early subscriber of Ohio Bell's ISDN Direct tariff for
residential customers.  I thought the Digest readers might be
interested in my experience with this new service.

* I want my ISDN

Prior to this new tariff, ISDN was only available via ISDN Centrex
service. I was excited to read in the local paper that the PUCO had
approved the residential tariff.  I called OBT the next day and
requested a single BRI line.  After a few days, I reached someone who
knew what ISDN was and took my initial order.

A few weeks later (OBT had not officially offered this service yet) a
tech came out and installed the line.  Once they were done testing the
line, I discovered that AT&T had not turned up the trunks for switched
digital access that they had put in the week before (my ISDN software
indicated "switching-equipment congestion").  After getting AT&T and
OBT on a conference call, they figured out what was needed to get the
trunks up and make them visible to my data calls.  The next day AT&T
called me to say that the trunk group was active and I should be in
business.

I powered up my Mac and brought up a file transfer program called
EasyTransfer (by Access Privilege) and called up a business partner in
Cincinnati who has ISDN (Cincinnati Bell).  He started his copy of
EasyTransfer and I placed a data call to his machine.  Presto it
worked!!  After exchanging some QuickTime movies which were 5-15MB in
size, we decided my ISDN connection was safe for real work. :-)

* It works, now what ...

Since then, our CO has been upgraded to support NI-1 and I am planning
to change my BRI line from Custom ISDN to NI-1 (my CPE supports both).
Ohio Bell and AT&T have bent over backwards to fix any problems and to
assist me in this and other ISDN-related ventures.  I have been using
ISDN to work at home, developing computer-integrated telephony
software.  I am going to replace my two existing POTS lines with
another ISDN line in a few months and use a XANCOMM Premise Control
Unit which has a BRI input (U interface), (2) analog POTS output
(CLASS Features supported), and a BRI output (S/T).

* FYI

Ameritech has set up an 800 number (1-800-TEAM-DATA) to handle any
data related questions and to steer customers to the right people when
ordering service.  I highly recommend you call them first if you want
to place an ISDN order. OBT has contracted a local VAR to handle CPE
needs/questions. The VAR has experience in leased lines but little
ISDN experience.  The lack of CPE experience and information from
telcos is still a big problem.  If you have to rely on them for CPE
selection advice, you are in trouble.  Some RBOCs (i.e., BellSouth)
have recognized these problems and are actively pursuing Alliance
programs which bring together CPE vendors, system integrators and VARs
to provide access to a collective pool of ISDN expertise for their
customers.

* Billing

I receive one integrated bill from OBT and AT&T for ISDN service, and
long distance voice calls ... AND, another bill from AT&T Accunet for
data calls.  It would be nice if AT&T could integrate the data calls
into my other bill (to save trees, postage, etc.).  AT&T, are you
listening?  Actually, I would prefer to not get a bill at all like the
lucky folks down in Tennessee who are getting ISDN for free during the
year long trial courtesy of BellSouth.  :-)

* CO info, CPE, Software, blah blah blah

The CO is an AT&T 5ESS running Generic 5E8 software (Custom ISDN and
NI-1). Since I am about 3.1 miles from the CO, they put a BRITE card
in the local CEV (bigger than a SLC-96, it is mostly underground) to
extend the service to me.  Although the tariff calls for a distance
charge, OBT is not charging for this since they decided to offer "ISDN
Anywhere" (they will extend ISDN to you even if your CO is not ISDN
ready yet ... YMMV depending on where you live).

I have an EuRoNiS Planet ISDN NuBUS card in my Mac and an AT&T NT-1 w/
power supply (Customer Powered Equipment).  The Planet board has an
analog jack on it for a POTS handset.  I will be upgrading to the new
Planet board soon which supports the BONDING protocol and it will
allow me to combine both B channels for a 128KB connection.  I have
tested CLI's Cameo Desktop Videoconferencing unit and the picture
quality is very good. It is aggressively priced below any other
solution I have seen yet for ISDN.

I purchased EasyTransfer and TheLink as a bundle.  TheLink is half
router software which uses Apple Internet Router (AIR) to allow ISDN
WAN links between AppleTalk networks.  If you are a remote user, you
do not run AIR on your machine.  CallProducer (by Q*Sys Int'l)
provides an integrated telephony desktop and adds telephony/LAN/PBX
integration. Aspects (by Group Technologies) is a very powerful
document conferencing package.

* Where to go for ISDN info

The North American ISDN User's Forum (NIUF) has a catalog which is
helpful when searching for ISDN resources and can be ordered by
calling [phone].  The Electronic Frontier Foundation has some
excellent white papers on ISDN [phone].  The Corporation for
Open Systems Int'l is working on interoperability testing of CPE, for
more info call [phone].  BellCore has various ISDN-related
publications and contact information, their ISDN hotline is (800) 992-
ISDN.


Ken Hester
CSC Partners, A Company of Computer Sciences Corporation
Internet: [e-mail]    AOL: KHester
IMHO, all opinions expressed are mine and CSC can borrow them if they ask.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 11:47:16 PDT
From: Mark Nichols <[e-mail]>
Organization: Belmont Information Services
Subject: WATS Service in Oregon in 1989


I am involved in a litigation investigation that hinges on the nature
of outbound WATS services that were available in Oregon in the 1989-90
timeframe.  In particular, a service that would allow one to call from
a fixed point in Oregon to anywhere else in Oregon at lower than
normal rates.

I know US West did and does now offer such a service, but how can I
find out what other carriers, if any, offered such a service?  I am in
California and don't know all the carriers who had a 1989 presence in
Oregon.


Thanks,

Mark Nichols * [e-mail] * Belmont Information Services * 714/644-1697

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 14:29:35 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Meera M Blattner)
Subject: Teleconferencing For Small Business


To small defense-expenditure dependent business in California, New
Mexico, and Washington, DC:

At the present time, large organizations are experimenting with
teleconferencing, networking, and groupware.  Smaller organizations do
not have the resources nor the infrastructure to use this new
technology.  Small business will face a serious disadvantage in the
near future as larger corporations develop efficient methods of
working through teleconferencing and groupware.  It is virtually
impossible for a small business to acess the ISDN lines and other
equipment required for this service.  To give small business a
competitive edge, a communication infrastructure can be built to allow
small organizations to communicate rapidly and with nearly the ease of
face to face meetings.

The Universities of California and New Mexico with participation from
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and other suppliers, are
submitting a proposal to the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA)
under the Technology Reinvestment Project (TRP) to fund a project to
provide small, defense-expenditure dependent business with access to a
national community of research scientists and engineers via video
teleconferencing and groupware.  These organizations would have
available, through their ethernet capable personal computers or
workstations, videoconferencing, collaborative work tools, databases,
multimedia mail, and bulletin boards.  Databases with the participants
addresses and phone numbers, areas of expertise and background of
participants will be available.  We would provide training and support
for the use of the equipment.

If your are interested in participating in this project, please let me
know as soon as possible, preferably by July 2, 1993 to Dr. Meera
Blattner, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, L-540, P.O. Box 808,
Livermore, CA, 94551, or contact me by e-mail ([e-mail]), or
call me at [phone].  We will fax you the necessary forms and
other information required.  PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS PROJECT IS LIMITED
TO CALIFORNIA, NEW MEXICO, AND WASHINGTON, DC.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Which Wires Are Which in a Six-Pair?
Organization: NIX - The Network Information eXchange
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 23:56:20 GMT



Hi all,

    I've been unable to find this information anywhere else.
I have to install six phone lines (to support a BBS) in my new apartment this
weekend.  I need to know what colors of a six-pair cable are which (i.e.,
green is pair one, red is pair two, etc.).

    I talked with PacBell service about it, and they claimed that
there wasn't any documentation on how the wiring should be.  The tech
did try to recall some of the colored pairs off the top of her head,
but it wasn't much of a help.

    Of course, they would be happy to install them for me, at the
usual high rate.  8-(


Any info appreciated!


INTERNET:  [e-mail]
Non-MX:  ryptyde![e-mail]
UUCP: {crash, nosc}!ryptyde!scott

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Phone Theft Alarm
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 18:07:39 GMT


There was a post about phoning from a military base wherein the poster
disconnected the phone and was immediately arrested, handcuffed, etc.
Actually, he was just yelled at.  Nonetheless, since I've started
travelling with a palmtop and pocket modem, I think I've made data
calls from about 40 motel rooms (and was unable to do so from about
three of them) and, although I've never been questioned, I've always
wondered if there was such a loop in the phone.

Not only have I removed modular plugs, I've also opened phones and gone
in with clipleads.  Never a problem.

Now the original poster was on a military base, and data calls were
not permitted, but had this happened to me in a civilian motel, I
think I'd raise holy heck.

Actually, I want to go on record as being appreciative of the
treatment that I received at the Little America property in Salt Lake
City.  The hotel is served by a Northern Telecom Meridian PBX.  Most
of the "Tower" rooms have data ports, but lots of the "Lodge" rooms
don't.  As soon as I entered the room, and spotted the set, I realized
that I was in trouble.  I called the desk and was told: We realize
that we don't have Data Ports in those rooms yet.  If you don't want
to upgrade to a Tower room, [which would have cost $40 more] you're
welcome to use a desk in the sales office any time between 5 PM and 8
AM.  I took them up on it.  They sat me at a desk where there was an
analog port.  I was told to have at it as long as I needed.  I'm
impressed.


Ed Greenberg           [e-mail]        Ham Radio: KM6CG

------------------------------

Date: 28 Jun 93 15:40:05
From: sceard!newline![e-mail] (Steve Edwards)
Subject: 411 Connections


On July 3, PacTel Cellular will change 411 to "connect you directly to
the requested party" for just $0.50! If you took the time to read the
entire letter, you would discover that "you can still reach Pacific
Bell directory assistance, at current prices, without the above
features, by dialing *619".


Sounds like an instant moneymaker to me ...

Steve Edwards      Internet: [e-mail]      Voice: [phone]
Newline               CompuServe: 73677,3561           Fax: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: I dunno ... are many people really using that
service? Has anyone got any hard data yet from other telcos?   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 29 Jun 93 15:22:04
From: sceard!newline![e-mail] (Steve Edwards)
Subject: Time to Process a Wiretap


In the June 28, 1993 issue of LAN Times p.35, there is an article that
states that it takes the White Plains, NY Police Department 20 minutes
to "process a day's worth of calling information on a court authorized
wiretap." This begs the question: How long does it take to process a
day's worth of calling information on a non-authorized wiretap?


Steve Edwards      Internet: [e-mail]      Voice: [phone]
Newline               CompuServe: 73677,3561           Fax: [phone]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #433
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18620;
          30 Jun 93 3:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03041
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 29 Jun 1993 22:52:31 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21224
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 29 Jun 1993 22:52:01 -0500
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 22:52:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #434

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 29 Jun 93 22:52:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 434

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Product Acronyms Question (Bill Creech)
    "SPC" Xbar, (was Re: Step-by-Step Offices) (Bud Couch)
    Data/Fax/Voice on Same Line? (Clovis R. David)
    Help: Literature and Papers on INMARSAT Standard-C (Dietmar Petras)
    But This *is* the Proper Place to Post Such Items (Paul Robinson)
    Motorola Advisor - What Freqency? (Glenn McComb)
    Maximum Number of Phone Lines to a Residence? (Reid R. Buyaky)
    Australian Prime Minister Urged to do a Clinton; Go E-mail (T Worthington)
    ESS Cut-Over in Toronto (Lester Hiraki)
    Defective Audiovox Handset (Brian T. Vita)
    ISOETEC PBXs and Connected Mouth Pieces (Charles McGuinness)
    Is Sprint Becoming More Aggressive? (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Only in Texas (Stephanie da Silva)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: AT&T Product Acronyms Question
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 19:17:17 -0700
Organization: Connected INC -- Internet Services Provider


What do the acronyms VTNS and DNS stand for?  I believe they are
related to AT&T long distance offerings.  Thanks for the help.


 Bill Creech   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bud Couch)
Subject: "SPC" Xbar (was Re: Step-by-Step Offices)
Organization: ADC Kentrox Industries, Inc.
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 16:21:00 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Terry Kennedy <TERRY@spcvxa.
spc.edu> writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>writes:

>> Well, Pacific Bell managed to provide Equal Access on #5 crossbars, if
>> you can believe that.  They had some company fab up an electronic
>> adjunt that connected to the xbar and implemented default carriers,
>> 10XXX dialing, and so on.  I had service on such a switch on 415-848
>> before was cut over to an electronic switch a couple of years ago.

> This sort of stuff was being experimented with by various groups.
> One project even added electronic control to SxS equipment. At least
> crossbar was easier to modify. In fact, the #4 crossbar (toll tandem)
> was modified for complete electronic control, producing the 4A/ETS
> toll switch. This is probably the most successful of these attempts.
> Most never went to production because they would not be cost-effective,
> compared with simply replacing the older switch with a 1ESS or newer
> model.

North Electric (NOT Northern Electric) was at one time 92% owned by
Ericsson and produced modified (for the US market) and original
designed crossbar systems built around the Ericsson xbar module. The
NX-1 was one of the modified systems.

A number of versions of the switch had been produced, but the NX-1D
was the version that I was familiar with when I worked there in the
the late 60's. When I left the company in '68, a development was
underway to counter the AT&T and AE electronic switches. One
development was an adaption of Ericsson's spc machine, the AXE-?, and
the other was a stopgap modification of the NX-1D, labeled the NX-1E
(for electronic).

North had developed a fair amount of familiarity with electronic
control, because of the creation of a billing system integrated into
the NX-1D for Class 4 toll-connecting requirements, and the design and
production of a couple of fully electronic (PAM, even!) tactical
switches for the Air Force.

Because of this experience, the NX-1E was released around '70, and a
number of them were sold. I beleive that even some existing NX-1D's
were retrofitted.

By this time, North had become a fully owned subsidiary of United
Utilities.  Later the comapny was sold to ITT for another one of their
abortive forays into the US market, which is why the only remains of a
company which produced telephone equipment from the turn of the
century is North Supply (still owned by UU) and ITT North Power
Systems.


Bud Couch - ADC Kentrox    [e-mail] (192.228.32.43)
insert legalistic bs disclaimer here

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (CLOVIS_R_DAVID)
Subject: Data/Fax/Voice on Same Line?
Date: 29 Jun 1993 10:25:48 -0600
Organization: Idaho State University, Pocatello


 I have yet to find a solution.  I thought I might post it here and
see what you gurus think.

    I want to be able to receive both fax and data calls at any
time.  I have a board supporting 9600 fax and 9600 data.  The problem
is that I don't have a dedicated "computer" line.  Therefore, I need
voice calls to be correctly routed to my phones/answering machine.
Also, if data and fax calls come in they should also be correctly
received.

    The problem of distinguishing between voice and fax calls can
be dealt with by using a fax switch.  However, the only way (as far as
I know) to have the fax switch distinguish data calls is to send
special codes along with the phone number.  This method I have found
to be unreliable and difficult because anyone calling over a modem
must know the special codes.  Even if successful this was successful
however, I would need special communications software to initialize
the 96/96 board correctly. That is, if a call reaches the software
(i.e. it's a fax or data call) then the software must initialize the
96/96 board for proper reception.  The other restriction is that I
need the software to be a Windows 3.1 application so that work can
continue to be done on my PC while the communication line is open.

    I have heard mention of software (Quicklink II) that might do
the job entirely but, I have been unable to get good information.  Is
there a hardware solution? Other ideas?


Thanks in advance,

Steve Fogarty [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dietmar Petras)
Subject: Help: Literature and Papers on INMARSAT Standard-C
Organization: Communication Networks
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 18:15:36 GMT


I need information about the Standard-C of INMARSAT.

INMARSAT is the International Maritime Satellite Organization.
Standard-C provides the possibility of exchanging messages between a
boat and a terrestrial subscriber and between boats, transmitting
distress signals within a worldwide distress and maritime security
system, broadcasting messages and so on. It is a store-and-forward
message transmission, which uses a small, low cost terminal with an
omni-directional antenna.

Is the anybody who could send me some references or Email addresses so
that I can get further information especially about the current status
of Standard-C?


Dietmar Petras              Aachen University of Technology
[e-mail]   Communication Networks
phone: ++49 (241) 80-7928   Kopernikusstr. 16
Fax: ++49 (241) 84964       D-5100 Aachen, Germany

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 13:21:24 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: But This *is* The Proper Place to Post Such Items
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


There have been some comments about the recent alleged fake Modem Tax
reoccurrence (which is more credible given William ("Read my lips I
will not raise taxes on the middle class") Clinton's intent to tax
100% of the economy except for TV show producers in Hollywood.)

This is a technical list.  The people who read this have a technical
background, and thus if a posting is fiction or has errors, this is
the proper place to post such items in order that people who do know
what is accurate can report on errors.

Technical publications are the place to expose questions or opinions
which may be wrong.  The correct place to review a new medical or
disease treatement which may or may not be effective, is in the pages
of the {New England Journal of Medicine} or similar publications which
have technical readership, not in the pages of {Reader's Digest}.

It's far better to have a rumor appear here -- and be found out to be
false, where we (as technical people) can wash our dirty laundry
privately among ourselves -- than to have one that would be embarrass-
ing to the on-line community being printed on the pages of the {Wall
Street Journal}.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]



[Moderator's Note: Well, I *sort of* agree with you Paul. Rumors can
be quickly started or stopped when they appear in a mailing list the
size of this one or the associated newsgroup. The trouble is, not
everyone reads every word in the Digest every day ... they see the rumor
but not the clarification or retraction the next day. There are lots
and lots of readers who see something here and immediatly act on it
without even reading for the next day or two to see if there are other
replies, etc. I have lots of those cases ... a dozen replies correcting
something will appear here, then a week or two later someone comes along
with another long, detailed reply ... its as though they never even read
the stuff that was appearing all week before them. And so it goes with
rumors here; some people were actually sending email to Clinton and Gore
protesting the 'new modem tax' within a couple hours of that issue going
out. I suspect there are still some who are behind in their reading who
have gotten that far but not as far as the correction, and they are now
writing Gore as well.  :(

Ditto the recent EFF rumor. My thinking is if anything will prove some
allegation or theory true or false in a hurry, it will be having it
appear right here in this Digest. Now that story about EFF and CuD was
going around on various newsgroups for at least a week, maybe more. I
put it here and true to form, within *hours* the top people at EFF had
written, and I pushed Mr. Kapor's article right to the top of the queue
and out ... I hope that dialog over the weekend helped at least slowed
down the rumor if not actually kill it completely. But the flip side
of the coin, as Mr. Barlow pointed out angrily in email to me later
the same day was that people only read what they want to read, and skip
large amounts of stuff. Someone behind in reading (or delivery) of the
Digest might just now be seeing last weekend's issues. It is him you
gotta watch out for ... he is behind, so he throws out five or six
issues unread in order to catch up ... but he read about the 'new modem
tax' and the 'EFF sellout' by golly!  :(  So do you squelch the publi-
cation of rumors to keep them from spreading or do you play them up
as lead stories in large circulation publications to keep them from
spreading by virtue of their exposure to a lot of scrutiny there?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Glenn McComb)
Subject: Motorola Advisor - What Freqencies?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 22:10:13 GMT


Can anyone out in netland tell me what the best frequency range is for
the Motorola Advisor alpha pager?  The company I bought it from sold
me a 462.xxx MHz, but I've heard somewhere that the 931.xxx MHZ is
'better'.

Please help!


 Glenn A. McComb        |   [phone] ofc * 725-0222 fax
 McComb Research        |    PO Box 220 * Cupertino, CA 95015
 gmccomb @ netcom.com   |                 MHS: glenn @ mccomb

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 09:16:49 EDT
From: mr!dev2![e-mail] (Reid R. Buyaky)
Subject: Maximum Number of Phone Lines to a Residence?


When I originally attemted to set up a multiline BBS system in my
home, the phone company gave me a long run-around about whether or not
they could provide me with eight additional phone lines.  The story
was first, they'd check, and get back to me. They DID get back to me
with "you're at the end of the trunk line in your neighborhood, and
only two lines are available."  When I followed up on that, they
agreed to run a NEW trunk line into my neighborhood in order to
provide me with the lines.  But it was Winter and they said they'd
have to wait til the ground thawed.

In the interim, I ordered a second residential line.  The phone
installer ran all the inside wiring and the phone didn't work.  She
said that the last line available on the trunk was bad, and that she
couldn't connect my second line.

Sometime between the "wait for the thaw" and "the thaw," I received a
call from the telco's engineer, who said they'd have to CHARGE me for
the labor involved with burying the new trunk line (around $5000?) in
order to give me eight phone lines.  I passed, and rented an office
where multiple lines were readily available.

Now four years have passed, and the phone company has provided me with
a 2nd line using the existing wires to my home (some sort of battery
pack drives it ... and it gives me terrible crosstalk).

I have been told by a phone company employee in NJ (and sysop of a
multiline BBS there) that the phone company is required by law to
provide the service requested by their customers, without additional
charge.

The phone company told me, though, that the law allows additional
charges for "unusual requests."  They considered eight phone lines to
a residence "unusual." (Heck ... I told them I had two kids and a
mom-in-law living with me, and also had a data line requirement, so
even WITHOUT the BBS, I could reasonably have a need for five lines
  ... they said even FOUR would be "unusual.")

Now, my question (finally). If I were to request two additional GOOD
lines into my residence (one for my kids and one for my modem) would
they HAVE to run a new trunk line at THEIR expense to accommodate
those lines?  If so, how many additional lines could typically be run
from that trunk line?  This would only be a total of three lines ...
hardly unusual today for a family of four, I think (mom-in-law has
moved <g>).

I've paid the phone company a FORTUNE in installation fees for my BBS
lines, and don't feel badly about getting some additional service out
of them.

If they DID put in an additional trunk line to accommodate a total of
two additional lines, would they be likely to come back to me if I
later asked to have up to sixteen lines added?

Any advice would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance.


 Reid R. Buyaky           Sysop: Heartland Multiline BBS
 Micro Resources, Inc.            [phone]
 Dublin, Ohio   UNIX Systems Integrators   Net: [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tom Worthington)
Subject: Australian Prime Minister Urged to do a Clinton; Go E-Mail
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 05:37:50 GMT


BY JOHN HILVERT

CANBERRA -- The Australian Computer Society has urged Prime Minister
Keating to follow US President Bill Clinton's lead and acquire an
electronic mail address.

ACS president Geoff Dober called on the Prime Minister to make himself
accessible via e-mail as part of a general strategy to encourage the
Government to promote electronic data networks.

In a letter to Keating, Dober pointed out that the US Clinton
administration has announced electronic mail addresses for the US
president and vice-president:

[e-mail]

[e-mail]

In an electronic mail message from the US President, Australians as
well as Americans have read: "Today, we are pleased to announce that,
for the first time in history, the White House will be connected to
you via electronic mail."

Dober called on Keating to announce the creation of the e-mail address:
"[e-mail]" by 1 July 1993.

"This would be of practical value in improving communication with the
people of Australia," wrote Dober. "I look forward to an announcement
that the Government and people of Australia will meet their American
friends on the electronic frontier."

>From COMPUTERWORLD Magazine Page 3, June 18, 1993. Reproduced by
permission of John Hilvert, Computerworld Canberra Editor
<[e-mail]>.

                        -----------

Posted by Tom Worthington , Director of the Community Affairs Board,
Australian Computer Society Inc. <[e-mail]>

ABOUT THE ACS: The Australian Computer Society is the professional
association in Australia for those in the computing and information
technology fields. Established in 1966, the ACS has over 14,000
members and on a per capita basis is one of the largest computer
societies in the world. ACS activities are announced in the Usenet
News group "aus.acs", available on the Internet.

------------------------------

Subject: ESS Cut-Over in Toronto
From: Lester Hiraki <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 21:55:00 -0400
Organization: CRS Online  (Toronto, Ontario)


On the morning of Saturday, June 26, 1993 the last analog switch in
Toronto, Canada was retired.  The Northern Electric ESS which served
NPA-NXX's 416-960, 416-961, 416-962 and 416-967 was replaced by a
Northern Telecom DMS-100 Supernode.

I had the privilege of observing the cutover that morning.  About 20
craftspersons were poised with their shears.  Each aisle and cable cut
point of the ESS was carefully marked with red tape.  A final check
was made to ensure there were no 911 calls in progress.  At 3:27 AM
battery was cut and the signal was given to begin cutting the cables.
There was a five minute flurry of activity as the craftspersons
sheared the cables.

In other COs in the city, the routing tables were updated to begin now
sending calls to the new switch.  Once all the cables on the ESS were
cut, the cut-over pins were pulled on the DMS line drawers to connect
each tip-ring pair from the distribution frame to the DMS line cards.
The cut-over was complete.  The new DMS had already been wired in
parallel and verified during prior weeks of board-to-board testing.
Subscriber features had also been pre-loaded.  A subscriber going
off-hook at 3:40 would hear dial tone from the new switch.

No alarms sound on the ESS during the cut-over.  Once the line-side
cables are cut, the ESS thinks there are no call originations.  Once
the routing tables in adjacent switches are updated, there is no trunk
traffic and the ESS thinks there are no call termination requests.
Thus it just sits there quietly.


[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 29 Jun 93 17:33:33 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Defective Audiovox Handset


> ...my Audiovox CMT-400 handset stopped working.

With reference to your June 21st post on the TELECOM Digest, I have a
good friend in the cellular repair business that has the parts that
you need.  His name is Dan Greeke and he is the owner of Autocomm.
Their telephone number is 508-463-0222 and their fax is 508-463-0220.

Dan tunes my cellular phones twice a year with a NOTICABLE improvement
in transmission quality each time.  We have Audiovox, Uniden and Oki
cell phones and have found that the Audiovox and Unidens tend to drift
out of tune frequently.  After tune-up the voice quality and number of
dropped calls drops dramatically!

Hope that this helps.

I have no connection with Autocomm or Dan other than as a satisfied
customer and, as a result, a friend of the owner.


Brian T. Vita   CSS, Inc.       CI$70702,2233

------------------------------

From: marks![e-mail] (Charles McGuinness)
Subject: ISOETEC PBXs and Connected Mouthpieces
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 10:23:57 EDT


Along the lines of ISDN phones controlling microphones from the switch ...

In our office we have an ISOETEC PBX.  One of its features is that
when you dial an extension, you are immediately cut through to the
speakerphone; the only warning the other party gets is a beep.  The
office protocol is that after you dial someone's extension you
plaintively call their name to get them to answer the phone.

Of course, should you not call their name, or they don't hear you, you
now can listen to the conversations in their room without their
knowing.  The only way, from then out, to tell if someone is listening
is to look at the phone.  Those of us who discuss confidential topics
and are aware of this flaw tend to be a bit paranoid about the phones.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 13:24:45 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Is Sprint Becoming More Aggressive?


> Seeing all these posts about AT&T's domestic calling plans reminds me
> of Sprint's advertisement featuring Candice Bergen where she jokingly
> shows a very complex flowchart/state diagram and describes it as your
> LD calling plan -- the point being with Sprint you don't have to
> worry about it -- they take care of it for you (do they?)

Well I have had US Sprint since before it was Sprint (started with US
Tel) and have had more mail in the last two months than ever before.
First I received the AT&T check in the mail, then I received an offer
to switch to Sprint ! 8*). Last Friday I received something saying
that I had been adjudged worthy and switched to some "Priority" ? plan
(still have not figured out what that means 8*(.

The downside was that they also and without asking changed my remote
access number to my home phone number plus a four digit PIN. I called
the 800 number and the gentleman assured me that the access with ny
phone number would be removed. I also requested that my account be
flagged to call before making any changes in the furture and he stated
that this would be done. We shall see.


Warmly,

Padgett

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Stephanie da Silva)
Subject: Only in Texas
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- [phone]
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 08:38:43 GMT


The Greater Houston Yellow Pages comes in two volumes: A thru L and M
thru Z.

The very first entry of the 1992-93 M thru Z volume reads like this:

Macaroni
- -----
Two Guys Who Glue Macaroni On
  Things  510 Branard ---------- 529-8369

I've been deathly curious to call these two guys up to find out what
exactly it is they do, but I can never work up the nerve to do so.

I also get the feeling they didn't want to compete with all the other
AAA ... (to infinity) entries in the first volume for top spot, so
they went after it in the second volume.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #434
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05809;
          30 Jun 93 18:48 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05210
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 30 Jun 1993 16:20:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07865
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 30 Jun 1993 16:19:50 -0500
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 16:19:50 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #435

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 30 Jun 93 16:19:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 435

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year (TELECOM Moderator)
    Dialing Instruction Changes in 802 Land (Garrett Wollman)
    Dialing "1" First (Peter Alan Dutton)
    Beep at Start of International Calls (Liron Lightwood)
    Number Disconnected - No Information (Reinhard Abdel Hamid)
    PDN Numbers (Henk Vriens)
    The Author of Leech Zmodem Responds (Les Reeves)
    Cellular Carriers (Steve Reisman)
    Caller-ID and Blocking (Mike King)
    Cellular FAQ Wanted (Alex M. Milshteyn)
    Wiring a New House (Mike Brand)
    Caller-ID and Bell Canada (Mark Brader)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1993 23:38:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year


In a one year period from 1991 through 1992, losses from cellular
phone fraud tripled from $100 million to $300 million nationwide
according to the Washington DC based Cellular Telecommunications
Industry Association.

Industry sources say Los Angeles cellular providers account for about
ten percent of the losses, which are passed on to consumers in higher
service costs.

Todd Young, an investigator for the Guidry Group, a Texas-based
organization which investigates cellular fraud for carriers all over
the United States said that Los Angeles is both the leader in cellular
fraud dollar volume and in the technology itself which makes the fraud
possible.  He said fraud techniques seem to begin in Los Angeles then
start showing up all over the country.

Young oversees investigations for the western half of the US for the
Guidry Group. He said in 1992 there were only twelve arrests in the
entire USA for cellular fraud, but that due to 'improved techniques in
detecting fraud' arrests have increased to about four a month during
1993, and these are mostly in the Los Angeles area.

The two main cellular providers in Los Angeles, LA Cellular and PacTel
Cellular both refused to say what their losses were last year, claiming
this is proprietary information ... must be pretty high, huh?  :)
Someone at the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association who
would not be quoted on the record said the two firms lose about two
million dollars between them *each month* from calls made on stolen
numbers. There are methods for calculating approximate losses due to
fraud where LA Cellular and PacTel Cellular are concerned; it involves
looking at chargebacks between the companies and other cellular carriers
where alleged 'roamers' came from when in the LA service area. Other
cellular companies are willing to talk -- when they think it in their
best interest to do so -- even though PacTel and LA Cellular want to
keep quiet.

To make matters worse, an infamous court decision in November, 1992 by
US District Court Judge Wallace Tashima has caused a complete halt to
cellular phone fraud prosecutions by the Secret Service. the one
federal agency which had been charged with investigating that crime.

According to Judge Tashima, ESNs are not the same as PINS or private
access codes, which is what the Secret Service regulates ... therefore
he ruled the Secret service out of order in investigating cellular
fraud involving the changing of ESNs ...  how do you like that?  :)

The end result in Los Angeles?  According to Stan Belitz, the Secret
Service special agent-in-charge of financial crimes in southern Cal-
ifornia, the Secret Service is no longer investigating cellular phone
fraud. The United States Attorney's office in Los Angeles no longer
prosecutes cellular phone fraud cases either.

"Why bother," said Mr. Belitz. "The judge in this district said
cellular fraud is not a violation of the law ..."  At present, the
Secret Service and the US Attorney in Los Angeles are considering
whether or not to appeal the ruling by Judge Tashima.

Todd Young said this is not a helpful turn of events. His firm and the
cellular clients he serves are trying to get the federal government
involved in more prosecutions ... but they may not succeed unless Judge
Tashima is overruled on appeal.

The majority of cellular fraud is made possible by the use of ESN
readers; devices which can pick up the serial number of a cellular
phone from almost two miles away. They are expensive devices, and
often cost about $5000, but apparently are well worth it to cellular
phone phreaks. Once an ESN has been obtained, the data is cloned on
blank computer chips. Stolen phones are then retrofitted with the
newsly-cloned chips, and in many cases, pirate manafacturers of cell
phones simply install the clone chips directly into new phones they
build in their factory.  About a year ago, a pirate factory where
illicit cellular phones were built was raided by the Secret Service.
As the phones were built, they were sold 'on the street' as 'ready
to use cellular phones; no carrier turn on required ...'

Of course this leads to the true -- and until this point unwitting --
customer of the cellular company getting a BIG bill a month or so
later, and typically roaming bills take a couple months to get back
to the home carrier, meaning pirated ESNs from Los Angeles get sold
in New York and vice-versa. Two or three months later, the owner of
the phone gets a shock when he sees the bill, and this is the first
notice the carrier had that something was wrong in many instances.

So phreaks, have phun!  Judge Tashima in Los Angeles Federal District
Court is on your side.


Patrick Townson

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 22:20:21 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Dialing Instruction Changes in 802 Land


This morning I received my new phone book for the "Burlington-Middlebury
Area", which covers about 150,000 people in northwestern Vermont (most
of that population being in 802 86[02345] and 654--660).  We have new
dialing instructions, according to the cover of the phone book, and so
I went searching for them.

This is the second year of separate business and residential listings,
with the new standard

  LASTNAME
    firstname1
    firstname2

layout that has been noted in other areas.  It is also the second year
of the irritating green coupon section between the white and yellow
pages.  The directions on the cover of the book directed me to the
`index page', which I eventually discovered meant `contents page'.  It
directed me to look for a small star in the table of contents (I
eventually found it), and chase that reference.  (Don't you just love
how New England Telephone makes life so much easier for all of us?)
Finally, I found out the following:

Effective September 15, all calling-card and operator-assisted calls
(but /not/ direct-dialed toll calls) within NPA 802 will be dialed
0+802+7D.  Direct-dialed calls within 802 will remain 1+7D or 7D
depending on toll status and/or the whim of the PSB.

Separately, if anyone is keeping tabs on this sort of thing,
Burlington 65x and 86x exchanges had five-digit dialing at least until
1984.  Some Yellow/Checker taxis still proudly display 4-7411 on their
signs; this became ambiguous about six years ago with the introduction
of the 654 exchange conflicting with the existing 864 exchange.  Many
areas in Vermont have only recently been converted from mechanical
(5D) to electronic (and therefore 7D) switches; I recall the
conversion of 527 St. Albans and 893 Milton only happened within the
past year or two, usually in conjunction with the introduction of
mandatory measured service.  On our University PBX, which owns the 802
656 exchange, all internal calls are still dialed 6+4D, except on
certain phones which are able to complete calls to a specific room
number.


Garrett A. Wollman  [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman     UVM disagrees.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter Alan Dutton)
Subject: Dialing "1" First
Date: 30 Jun 1993 03:24:03 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute


When I make calls from Long Island (where I'm from) I never have to
dial a "1" first no matter where I am calling in North America. I
still have a hard time remembering to dial "1" first for calls outside
the area code here in Massachusetts. I can understand why one would
need to dial a "1" first for extra-area-code calls (in case some
exchanges within the area code are numbers that used to be reserved
only for area codes, for example). Apparently, they still use only
normal exchanges for (516), and so the telephone company automatically
knows if one has dialed an area code or not.

But what I don't understand is whenever I call, say, Framingham, a
mere 20 or so miles from here in Worcester, and in the same area code,
they tell me that they cannot complete my call unless I dial a "1"
first.  Now if the phone company knows that it's a number that they
want me to dial a "1" first for, then why can't they just connect me
in the first place?

If I didn't explain that well enough: I dial "383-xxxx" and the
recording tells me "We're sorry, you must first dial a '1' to reach
that number" and I curse and hang up and dial "1-383-xxx" even though
it's not a long distance number (since it's in the same area code, and
rather close by, to boot), and New England Telephone just KNOWS that
I'm calling Framingham in the first place, else I wouldn't have gotten
that recording. Why does this happen?

I do realize that local calling areas are MUCH smaller, populationwise
and areawise, in New England than in Metro New York (compare the local
calling areas of Nassau County, New York, and Raymond, Maine), so why
the "1"?

Similarly, if I don't realize that a phone number I am calling is in
Worcester, and I dial a "1" first because I think I'm being clever by
trying to avoid the recorded message, they tell me that I have to call
the number again, and this time without the "1". Again, I ask, if they
know I don't have to dial the "1", then why don't they know enough to
connect me?

This has bugged me for a while ...


Peter D!

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 17:22:09 +1000
From: Liron Lightwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Beep at Start of International Calls


In comp.dcom.telecom is written:


>> From: [e-mail] (Cris Pedregal-Martin)
>> Things I'd like to see added to the Easy Reach (tm) service:

>> a- When I get a call from abroad, there's always a short high pitched
>> beep.  I'd like a similar thing on Easy Reach, so I can tell the call
>> came through ER and not the regular number I happen to be at.

> Almost certainly the beep on calls from abroad is a "bug not a feature".
> I suspect it's a very short burst of the 2600 Hz that is still used on
> MF trunks as a supervisory signal.

I have noticed this beep whenever dialing international calls from
here in Australia.  Does this beep always occur in other countries
too?

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Reinhard Abdel Hamid)
Subject: Number Disconnected - No Information
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Universitaet Hannover, Theoretische Nachrichtentechnik
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 10:07:55 GMT


Hello everyone in the USA!  I have a problem:

I want to get in touch with someone in NY, but I only know his nickname.
And when I call his number I hear a recording:

"The numer XXX XXXX has been disconnected. There is no further
information available.".

This effect is since February. Before February I was talking to him on
that number.

Is there any possibility to call him or to ask him to call me back,
when I only know his old number?  I think, the owner's adreess or his
new number must be saved anywhere, right?


Thanks and greetings,

Reinhard


[Moderator's Note: With only a nickname to go by, skip-tracing or lo-
cating this party would be hard to do. If you have his address (or
old address in the event he moved), a criss-cross directory could be
consulted in the hopes of learning the name the phone number was listed
under; also his (former) neighbors might know where he has gone. If
you are counting on telco to look up the old records on a disconnected
number and provide information, you can forget it. This will have to
be something you do on your own or with assistance from someone in the
USA who has easy access to x-ref directories here, etc.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Henk Vriens)
Subject: PDN Numbers
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ericsson Telecom, Stockholm, Sweden
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 14:16:16 GMT


I'm looking for a list of numbers for public data networks around the
world.  Anyone gotta lead to one??


Henk Vriens


[Moderator's Note: I assume you mean just the networks themselves and
their corporate information and sales offices, etc. That is manageable.
A list of all their dialups would go on forever.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 23:46:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: The Author of Leech Zmodem Responds


I posted the note about Leech ZModem in the Interlink BBS DSZ
conference echo.  I thought warnings about this hack might be news to
others, as it was to me.  Much to my surprise, I got the messsage from
someone calling themselves James West, claiming to be the author of
this hack.  This is his reply to seeing the warning about Leech
Zmodem:

Well essentially you are right ... using Leech ZModem is very rude.
But it does help. This is merely a personal opinion, but a lot of
those places out there are too steep to worry about maintaining an
upload/download ratio, etc.

Being the author of LZM, I can naturally tell you what it does. ZSKIP
in batch transfers, ZCAN on single file transfers.

And I'd like to add that I did write my own protocol, not a modification
of someone elses version.

Anyways, thanks for noticing. (I think).

Oh, and thanks for the info on the newer ZModem releases ... I've never
had any problems using LZM, but if I ever do, I'll be sure to keep
this in mind.


Graphics Connection  Salt Lake City, UT [phone]

------------------------------

Subject: Cellular Carriers Survey
From: [e-mail] (Steve Reisman)
Date: 30 Jun 93 23:24:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Steve Reisman)


I am starting a project studying cellular services.  I am seeking
information about carriers, their rates, and their reliability.  I
would appreciate any help that can be provided.

1. Is there a national cellular network?

2. If not, are there plans for one?

3. Which are the cellular companies with the broadest range, most
reliable service and competitive sales programs?

4. Do any of the cellular companies have deals for bulk usage?  For
regular corporate long distance usage, there are rebillers,
resellers, aggregators, direct deals with carriers, etc.  Do any of
these arrangements extend to cellular usage?

5. Which cellular network is the "AT&T" of cellular service?   (No
offense intended to MCI or other pretenders.)

6. Are all cellular rates 'tariffed' by the FCC?

Thanks for any information.  If the questions are too broad or too
simplistic, please steer me to reference sources that can help me
gather the info.


Steve

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 93 07:49:35 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Caller-ID and Blocking


In {The Washington Post}, on Friday, 25 June, there was an article
regarding consumer rights and Caller-ID.  While most of the article
was information we've seen here in {Telecom Digest}, the article had a
sidebar indicating which states offer which Caller-ID/Blocking
services.  So as an update:

States that have no Caller ID: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Minnesota,
Montana, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Utah;

States that allow no call blocking: Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee,
Virginia, West Virginia;

States that only allow per-line blocking:  Georgia;

States that only allow per-call blocking: Alabama, Arkansas,
Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,
Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oklahoma,
Washington, DC, Wisconsin;

States that allow Caller-ID blocking per-call or per-line: Arizona,
Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South
Carolina, Vermont, Washington.

The source of the information is the National Association of Regulatory
Utility Commissioners.


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

From: Alex M. Milshteyn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular FAQ Wanted
Organization: Mass General Hospital CIPR Imaging Center
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 12:21:47 GMT


Is there an FAQ list on cellular phones and services?


Thanks,

Alexander M. Milshteyn M.D.   <[e-mail]>
CIPR, MGH in Boston, MA.     [phone] Vox  [phone] Fax

------------------------------

Subject: Wiring a New House
From: [e-mail] (Mike Brand)
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 93 19:11:15 CDT
Organization: The Keeper of Time BBS  [phone]


Hello all,

We will be moving soon to a new house. Since this will be new
construction and we will have to wire the house for telephone and TV
ourselves. I was hoping to get some of your ideas on the best way to
do this, with an eye to the future.

I was planning on running coax (75 ohm) for TV, and six pair (twisted)
for the telephone and future data needs. I was also planning on making
a cable run from the basement to each individual room, then using a
junction box or distribution tree to connect the individual lines
together.

I would be interested in hearing your ideas, please send them to me
and I will collect them and post a summary. Thanks!


Mike Brand - [e-mail]     The Keeper of Time BBS
  N9TLV                                   1 708 389 1369

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Caller ID and Bell Canada
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 93 22:18:29 GMT


John Macdonald ([e-mail]) writes:

> Here in Bell Canada area, you have the choice of paying
> 0.85 *per call* to suppress caller ID, which I consider extortion.

The CRTC thought so too.  Free per-call blocking has been available in
Toronto for some time, and I presume all Bell Canada land has it now
(where there is Caller ID in the first place, that is).  John should
have seen an insert in his phone bill when it became available.

For what I suspect are psychological reasons, Bell requires you to
phone them and *ask* for per-call blocking, which they call by the
unfortunate name of Call Block.

Incidentally, with Bell Canada, if you have Call Return, you are told
the number that last called you, and given the *option* of returning
the call.  If Call Block was used on that call, then you are told that
the number "cannot be given out", and then given the option of
returning the call anyway.  This is, of course, exactly how it
*should* work; kudos to Bell.

(Well, almost exactly.  Even though Bell still uses "1 for toll"
dialing, the *69 message does not tell you whether the call will be
toll or not.)


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #435
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07399;
          30 Jun 93 19:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13851
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 30 Jun 1993 16:50:58 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12715
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 30 Jun 1993 16:50:16 -0500
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 16:50:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #436

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 30 Jun 93 16:50:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 436

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Future of ISDN (William H. Sohl)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: All IXCs Must File Tariffs; What it Means (David G. Lewis)
    Re: All IXCs Must File Tariffs; What it Means (Mark Wilkins)
    Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT! (David J. Greenberger)
    Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT! (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Vartec Telecom (Robert Eden)
    Re: Vartec Telecom (Brendan B. Boerner)
    Re: Van Jacobson Talk Last Thursday (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Lightning, EMP, and Terrorist's Latest EMP Toys (Ben Burch)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
All article submissions MUST be sent to our email address: telecom@eecs.
nwu.edu -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 93 12:33:22 GMT


I've posted this reply to comp.dcom.telecom as that is where it
originated.  I've also posted a copy to comp.dcom.isdn, a separate
newsgroup for ISDN topics only.

In article <[e-mail]> Martin McCormick <martin@
datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu> writes:

> Many people believe that ISDN is a system whose time went
> about five years before it came.  Something tells me that, in the
> words of Mark Twain, reports of the demise of ISDN are greatly
> exaggerated providing a couple of things happen:

> The people who make the business decisions at telephone
> companies need to start thinking of ISDN as another form of POTS
> rather than some marvelous new form of telecommunication.  If
> anything, prices for ISDN should be lower in order to get the public,
> both residential and business, used to buying and using ISDN
> equipment.

Actually, for most of us, we already are deploying and implementing
ISDN as a form of POTS.  From my perspective ISDN is the next major
change in the POTS arena.  Having said that, it is not simply a matter
for the telcos to price a new service offering (ISDN) at whatever they
choose.  The service offering costs/tariffs are subject to lengthy and
exhaustive review and approval by the various state regulatory bodies,
the end result of which is the final service offering costs.  Telcos
can not simply offer ISDN (or any other new service) at an "low
introductory price" just to increase initial sales and deployment.

> Why bother?  Here is the real reason why ISDN could still be
> the telephone system of the future.  There has been lots of talk about
> the wonders awaiting us when telephone companies began to replace the
> copper pairs to our houses with fiber optics.  This is probably going
> to happen sooner or later and when it does, the way our telephone
> communicates with the world will have to change, also.  It would seem
> that ISDN would be a natural for inclusion on the bit stream to each
> house or business.  It would be just another channel multiplexed on to
> the fiber with the cable TV and Heaven-knows what else.

Agreed.

> ISDN, in and of itself, does not appear to be anything that
> special, but it fits right in with the way the rest of communications
> technology his heading and that, alone, is a good reason to promote it
> as a desirable choice.

Actually, when you consider that you get 2 B channels (64Kb each) and
a D channel (16Kb packet), you end up with a considerably improved
data environment than anything you can do today on POTS.  Anyone that
currently uses a modem from home, even if it is a 9.6Kb modem (and
most home operations are more along the 4.8, 2.4 and 1.2Kb range)
you'll see a minimum five times improvement in file transfer and
interactive screen display activity, etc.  Most home users would see
an increase in throughput rate just using the 16Kb packet D channel.

Additionally, there are tremendous strides being made in video
compression and the ability to have a video telephone call is much
more a reality today than the old analog picture phone technology was
20 years ago.  Sure, at 64Kb one doesn't get full motion video, but
the prospect of a video connection, even with no motion, yet updated
every few seconds is probably a very acceptable initial service
application.

Anyway, I'm obviously biased towards ISDN having been involved in its
North American germination and now deployment for almost 10 years, but
I don't see anything on the immediate horizon (within 10 years) that
is likely to provide such a significant capability enhancement to the
average telephone user without a significant change (e.g. deployment
of fiber) in the "last mile" of local loop plant facilities.


Bill Sohl (and Barbara Shaw) Bellcore ISDN Information Hotline [phone]-ISDN
Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 23:21:18 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Martin McCormick <martin@
datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu> writes:

> I remember hearing a telecommunications-related program on
> Radio Australia during the mid eighties that discussed ISDN and
> mentioned a couple of cleaver acronyms for it.  If you are a
> telecommunications provider, it stands for "I Smell Dollars, Now."  If
> you are a customer, ISDN stands for "Innovations Subscribers Don't
> Need."

And, of course, if you are a user of major worldwide data networks
such as the Internet, ISDN stands for "It Still Does Nothing".

 From the point of view of Joe Phone Customer, there are several
things wrong with ISDN:

- When the power goes out, you can't use it.
- You need a separate line for each extension in the house.
- Nobody needs digital voice.
- You have to live within 18000 feet of the CO or mux.
- Terminal equipment is extremely expensive.

 From my point of view, broadband ISDN may well turn out to be
something interesting.  However, narrowband 2B+D ISDN is completely
useless in 99% of all residential settings.


Garrett A. Wollman    [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman       UVM disagrees.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: All IXCs Must File Tariffs; What it Means
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1993 14:58:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lars
Poulsen) writes:

> From the {Washington Post} Business Section, Page D1, 22 June 1993:

>> "MCI lost its appeal to the [US] Supreme Court of a lower court ruling
>> that found the FCC had improperly dismissed a complaint by AT&T, which
>> argued that all long-distance telephone companies should file their
>> rates with the Commission.  The justices let stand the lower court
>> ruling without comment."

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>> Now what does this mean?

> The MFJ requires "the dominant IXC" (i.e. AT&T) to file tarriffs for
> all their services, including special discount deals to very large
> customers. MCI and Sprint can offer discounts from their tarriffed
> prices without filing. MCI and Sprint have been using the customer
> profiles from these special tariff filings ("Tariff 12 schedules") to
> determine how "firm/soft" ATT's pricing is. Some resellers have been
> using these special profiles to obtain the same megadiscounts that the
> big end-users were getting and then reselling them piecemeal.

> AT&T requested a level playing field. The court decided to continue the
> asymmetry.

Actually, not.  You missed a step.  AT&T requested a level playing
field.  The FCC dismissed this complaint.  AT&T appealed, and a court
held that the FCC had improperly dismissed the complaint.  The US
Supreme Court let this ruling stand without comment, meaning that the
AT&T complaint to the FCC is held to have been improperly dismissed.
In other words, the AT&T complaint -- holding that all IXCs should
have to file tariffs -- has to be accepted by the FCC and the FCC has
to issue rules holding all IXCs to file tariffs for all services.

Disclaimer: I don't work in legal or regulatory affairs, so I may be
misstating some details.  I believe the above to be the gist of the
decision, though.


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation

------------------------------

From: Mark Wilkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: All IXCs Must File Tariffs; What it Means
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 15:21:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lars
Poulsen) writes:

> From the {Washington Post} Business Section, Page D1, 22 June 1993:

>> "MCI lost its appeal to the [US] Supreme Court of a lower court ruling
>> that found the FCC had improperly dismissed a complaint by AT&T, which
>> argued that all long-distance telephone companies should file their
>> rates with the Commission.  The justices let stand the lower court
>> ruling without comment."

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>> Now what does this mean?

It means this: The FCC dismissed AT&T's request for a level playing
field.  The lower court said this was not fair, that AT&T's request
was worthy of further review.  MCI said "No, the FCC should be allowed
to deny AT&T's request if they want to," and took the case to the
Supreme Court, which refused to review MCI's claim, essentially saying
that the lower court was right in saying the FCC treated AT&T unfairly.

In other words, the ruling was in AT&T's favor.


Mark Wilkins

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David J. Greenberger)
Subject: Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT!
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Young Israel of Cornell
Date: 29 Jun 93 12:34:16 GMT


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> Whenever I lost money in a GTE payphone, I *always* reported it; not
> because I needed the money back all that badly, but because GTE placed
> its coin refunds in these nice little cardboard coin carriers.  I
> never bothered with Pacific Bell unless I'd lost more than 50c,
> because they would send you a check for whatever was lost.  They had
> preprinted checks in three colors with the words "MAXIMUM VALUE TEN
> CENTS".

I don't know of other cities have similar phones, but in addition to
the usual New York Telephone pay phones scattered around the city,
there are a small number of phones belonging to companies no one's
ever heard of.  The last time I used one of those phones, I put in a
quarter and dialed away, but I was informed that I hadn't inserted a
quarter.  I called the operator and requested a refund.  She said she
would mail me 25 cents.  I never got it.

Since then, I never use non-New York Telephone pay phones (in New
York, of course).  If I have to make a phone call and all I find is a
non-NYT phone, I'll keep on looking.  It's not that 25 cents is that
much (it's even less than the postage they'd have to pay to get it to
me); I just see no reason to use phones that both are of poor quality
and have poor customer support if they charge the same as New York
Telephone.


David J. Greenberger      [phone]      [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT!
Date: 30 Jun 1993 01:00:47 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> Paul Robinson <0005066432@
MCIMAIL.COM> writes:

> An item from "Steal This Book" discusses the tendency of phone
> companies to mail refund claims of (small amounts) of lost money as it
> was usually cheaper than investigating even if they got some false
> claims.

Pacific Bell, and probably other telcos, will first ask you if you if
you have telephone service in your name with them.  If so, they will
just credit your phone bill with the amount of the loss from the coin
phone.  Otherwise, they'll mail you the check.  Also, one of the
reasons that they will go to the administrative expense of mailing a
check rather than just give you credit for the next call is that it
eliminates the motivation of phalsly reporting a coin loss just to get
a free call.  Imagine the problem the telco would have if they allowed
you to say "Gee, operator, this @#$^ phone just ate my quarter.  Now
I'm out of money, and I really need to make this call."  Everyone
would use this excuse to get free local calls.  Now, there's still the
opportunity for phalse reports, but the motivation is much less, as
there's no way to get an immediate free call.  And you can still get
your money back (eventually) if you really have a problem.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Robert Eden <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Vartec Telecom
Date: 30 Jun 93 12:36:58 CST
Organization: Texas Utilities, Glen Rose TX


In article <[e-mail]>, Ken Jongsma <73115.1041@
CompuServe.COM> writes:

> Today in the mail, I received a letter from a company called VarTec
> Telecom.  They are a long distance reseller, but curiously enough,
> were not asking that I sign up as a dial 1 customer. Instead, they
> included a number of stickers with their 10XXX code (10811) and
> instructions on how to dial using this code.

I've been getting packages from them for about two years.  I thought it
was a good deal.  They said they were cheaper than MCI -- guaranteed.

Well, I got my bill.  They were cheap, but not as cheap as my MCI
calls.  When I called and told them I pay .08 per minute anywhere out
of state with MCI and they were billing higher their response was "oh
well".

My advise to anyone wanting to use them (or any other IXC) check the
price -- don't accept the vendor's "guarantee" of lower rates.


Robert Eden    817-897-0491                                 Glen Rose, TX
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station            [e-mail]
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ politicese for a nuke plant


[Moderator's Note: That is one of the points I stress on the 1+
service and 800 services I offer: there is no risk, no need to accept
my word on the prices. I send out printed literature, and you can use
my services month by month, dropping them whenever your own comparisons
show you could do better elsewhere.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brendan B. Boerner)
Subject: Re: Vartec Telecom
Organization: Novell, Inc. -- Austin
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 19:40:35 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Ken Jongsma <73115.1041@
CompuServe.COM> writes:

> Today in the mail, I received a letter from a company called VarTec
> Telecom.  They are a long distance reseller, but curiously enough,
> were not asking that I sign up as a dial 1 customer. Instead, they
> included a number of stickers with their 10XXX code (10811) and
> instructions on how to dial using this code.

I got that too and decided to try them out.  I called my brother in
Irving from Austin and that line seemed ok.  I called my dad in Orange
Grove (a small, rural town about 35 miles north east of Corpus
Christi) and had a horrible connection (tried three different times
over several weeks) although dialing 1+ using AT&T had no problems.

After about four weeks of this, I got a call from a Vartec rep. who
wanted us to switch over to Vartec for 1+.  After I explained that I
wasn't interested because of the poor line quality to my dad, he said
that would go away with 1+.  Does this make sense?  Anyway, I decided
to stick with AT&T and try Vartec for non-O.G. calls for further
research.


Brendan


[Moderator's Note: Nothing 'goes away' (or for that matter comes
around) with 10xxx that is not present (or absent) with 1+.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: re: Van Jacobson Talk Last Thursday
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 04:39:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> Here is my recollection of what he had to say about why we don't need
> ATM.  (These are my words, and if I misrepresent Van's views it's all
> my fault.)

To summarize VJ's arguments, he suggests that ATM uses fixed-length
cells as a substitute for adeqauate buffering in order to provide
isochronous traffic for audio-visual applications ...

Alas, this argument is specious.  IP provides no bounds whatsoever on
delay.  It provides no reserved bandwidth.  Thus nearly the entire
program might need to be buffered and read-time wouldn't be possible.
ATM allows reserved-bandwidth connections with bounded delay, thus
allowing a modest build-out buffer at the receiver to regenerate the
original isochronous (essentially the same as synchronous fixed-rate)
signal.  The bounded delay (milliseconds) is of course critical for
many applications.

> ATM has some other problems.  It uses virtual circuits, which many
> people believe make it less resistant to failure.  In many ways, this
> reflects the telco origins of ATM and its application, B-ISDN.
> Consider what happens when a telco switch fails: major catastrophe!
> Now consider what happens when an Internet router fails: dynamic
> routing and IP's trademark hop-by-hop forwarding quickly combine to
> repair connectivity as much as possible ...

This is, of course, the oldest religious argument in the book against
circuits.  ATM and for that matter the old devil X.25 [ :-) ] can have
dynamic rerouting too, albeit with a glitch in case of circuit failure.

> The final problem is that ATM isn't here yet.  In order to do
> real-time multimedia the ATM way, we would have to replace all our
> LANs, all our routers, and all of our host software; many of these
> elements still haven't been developed yet for ATM.  By contrast, the
> PARC Fourm videocast is itself a proof-by-example that we can do
> real-time /today/, over the existing packet-switched, non-virtual-
> circuit-based, non-synchronized IP network.  ATM simply doesn't buy
> us anything over a scaled-up version of IP.

Good excuse to not move forward.  Let's just extend the existing
product forever!

This whole argument is, alas, the sort of atrophy that leads to
religious wars, not to mention the proliferation of "oldies" and
"classic rock" radio stations that play the music we listened to as
kids because we stopped listening to new stuff after turning 25.  In
the network world, it becomes the religious arguments of virtual
circuits vs. datagrammes.  This was hot stuff in 1977.

Van Jacobson is a smart fellow; he took Raj Jain's CUTE (congestion
control using time-outs at the end-to-end layer) and got the TCP world
to adopt it, slightly modified, as his "slow-start".  If TCP/IP were
replaced by ATM, though, I fear his day in the sun would fade into
history.  It's sad to see him wasting his time arguing that what was
right for 1985 will be the only thing right for 1995 and beyond.

ATM is not complete yet.  There's a whole lot of work left to do in
the area of flow control, for one: The phone companies got the
original standards to be rate-based (open-loop) only, but we're
finally working on closed-loop (feedback flow control) at ANSI T1S1
and ATM Forum.  It's a whole new ballgame, aimed at a more complex set
of problems than the ones that TCP/IP solves so well.  Bashing ATM is
sort of a waste of time.  Everybody involved with a few exceptions
understands that there's much more to be done.  I have had a jolly
time on the rubber chicken circuit extolling its vices, as currently
defined.  But I also see its potential virtues, and the virtues of
other connection-oriented technologies.  So I'm actively looking to
cure or at least find ways around the vices.  This is harder than just
bashing.


Fred R. Goldstein k1io [e-mail]
[phone]  Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission

------------------------------

From: Ben Burch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Lightning, EMP, and Terrorist's Latest EMP Toys
Organization: Motorola, Inc.
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 02:38:26 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Robert Monaghan, VB7R0027@
vm.cis.smu.edu writes:

> The requisite technology is within the grasp of the average irate
> telecom customer, consisting mainly of a coil surrounded by explosives
> and a means to generate a current in the coil prior to detonating the
> explosive.

Well ... but isn't this obvious?  I did some work at the Fermilab
Magnet Test Facility, and I remember proposing just such a device over
lunch with some of the magnet physicists.  I recall that they were
somewhat disgusted with the idea, as were most of the other folks I
tried it out on.  That was back in 1980.

One note; If you have the coil be superconducting, you don't need to
carry your current generating device aloft, but you do need a good
dewar, and some cryo handling equipment.  The EMF you can get with the
superconducting magnets probably more than offset this weight penalty.


Ben Burch                     | Motorola Wireless Data Group:
[e-mail]  | Good PDAs go EVERYWHERE.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #436
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02667;
          1 Jul 93 20:05 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14035
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Jul 1993 17:09:44 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19896
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Jul 1993 17:09:03 -0500
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 17:09:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #437

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 1 Jul 93 17:09:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 437

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Help!!! Broken Hard Drive Shuts Down BBS (Samuel R. Kaplan)
    New York Telephone Outage (John Hawkinson)
    PC Expo (Alan Boritz)
    GSM Security (Evangelos Kontogiannis)
    The Bouncer (Monty Solomon)
    Bad Directory Listings at C&P (Tad Cook)
    Modem/Fax Fixture For Cellphones (Europe) (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    Time Signals via Modem (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    Sigh -- is This an Area-Code Change Problem? (J. Eric Townsend)
    Net Safari '93 (Paul Houle)
    Gnocchi al Telefono (Gabe M. Wiener)
    Re: Why -48V on Local Loop? (Al Varney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Samuel R. Kaplan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help!!!  Broken Hard Drive Shuts Down BBS
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 19:11:06 GMT


The bad news is my Maxtor 213 HD died after 17 months service.

The good news is that I am able to run Procomm plus off a floppy in
host mode to tell users that the board is down for a couple of weeks.

The bad news is that I can read the message on the host computer but
no one else can.

The good news is the manual tells exactly what to do:

    This can result if the modem connected to the host computer is
sluggish.  If so, it reports CD high before the connection is
correctly established.  The welcome message is sent out as soon as CD
is reported high and auto baud detect is finished.  To correct this,
add several of the pause character (normally the tilde, ~) to the
Host-mode welcome message:

   ~~~~Message ...

The bad news is this doesn't help.

I have tried a 2400etc/e external from ATI, a 9600 ex from Intel, and
the old internal 2400ATI.  All the same.

Normally the EBB runs PCBoard 14.5a with a single line in.  Have been
unable to figure how to run a closed board off a floppy.  Clark was
not much help.

Ideas?   Please reply by E-mail.  Thanks.


  Sam Kaplan            804 982 5819
  University of Virginia    804 982 5524 FAX
  Center for Public Service    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Hawkinson)
Subject: New York Telephone Outage: Cut Cable in Mount Vernon
Date: 1 Jul 1993 00:05:36 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


According to New York Telephone, there has been a cut trunk (cable) in
Mount Vernon, NY, causing a major service disruption. The estimated
time for completion of repair is 5:00pm Friday! The disruption has the
following effects:

*    A large number (all?) of 914 (Westchester, including Yonkers,
    White Plains, etc.)  numbers are unreachable from 212 (and
    perhaps other places). You get an ``all circuits busy'' message.

*    A large number (all?) of 212 numbers are unreachable
    from most of 914. You just get a fast busy.

*    At least some 914 numbers are unreachable from 914. Again, just
    a fast busy. This might be dependant on your switch (my switch,
    which covers 914-969 and some others, is a 1AESS).

*    Many phone services are unreachable from 914 (for me, at least),
    such as 411 and 555-1212 (directory assistance), 0 (the local
    operator), 211 (automated/manual credit), and in some instances,
    611 (repair). I was successful getting through to repair via
    890-6611, once, and via 611 once.

As I said above, New York Telephone's latest estimate is that the
problem will be repaired by 5:00pm Friday. Apparently a construction
firm cut a trunk (perhaps more than one) to cause this problem.

To go around the problem, you should be able to route your calls
through AT&T, MCI, Sprint, or another long distance company, by
dialing

    10XXX-1-nnn-mmm-mmmm

Where 10XXX is a carrier access code, like:

    10288 for AT&T
    10333 for Sprint
    10222 for MCI
and    10698 for NYtelephone (ha, ha)

nnn is the area code (might not be necessary if you're in the same
area code as the number you're trying to reach), and mmm-mmmm is the
phone number (exchange and unit #).


John Hawkinson    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 01 Jul 93 08:19:55 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: PC Expo


While a Canadian technology exhibit in the lobby of the Javits
Convention Center, in New York City, was talking up (literally) the
merits of state of the art computer technology, thousands of corporate
buyers waited hours to receive pre-registered exhibit passes ... because
the exhibit management company's registration computers were down for
the first hour that the show was open.  The lines for the cash-paying
customers, in the main lobby, were just as bad, though eased up a bit
as potential attendees left.

That was the how the 1993 PC Expo convention began this year; first
the lobbies were literally jammed with people trying to get in, then
the convention floor was jammed, and the air conditioning wasn't
working properly on three of the four levels. It's a wonder that most
industry people who were not meeting someone at the show had not left
after a couple of hours waiting for a "free" badge, or if they waited
they surely had difficulty getting through the crowds to see any
product, or simply did not have the patience to stop and see the
product for which they came.

Coin phones?  Oh they've got hundreds of them at the Javits Center,
but each one had a line of people waiting to use them.  Javits Center
allowed AT&T to take out a lot of coin phones and replace them with
data/voice card-only phones (into which one could connect a laptop
computer modem) and partially functioning AT&T Payphone 2000
voice/data terminals (you know, the ones that "Mother" says "you will"
have, but everyone else says "you won't").

One innovative feature, though, was an exhibitor directory available
to be purchased on disk for $10.  It's a nice little database program
that uses windows-style graphics on a VGA and makes looking for
vendors and products a little easier.  Only thing is that it won't run
properly on an EGA-equipped machine.  It's not in the documentation
(silk-screen printed on the top of the disk), but you need to use
"EGA" or "CGA" arguments to make it run on those machines.  Guess
monochrome users are out of luck. ;) Oh, and I thought that the
"slot-holder" disk cover was very clever and may use the product in
the future.  (Hey, I *did* get something valuable out of this show,
afterall! ;)

But, gee, I sure wish I wasn't waiting on line for two hours while
missing Bill Gates' keynote speech.  Sure would have liked to see the
product I could only read about in trade publications.  Well maybe
next year ... not!


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Jul 93 08:57:05 +0300
From: [e-mail] (Evangelos Kontogiannis)
Subject: GSM Security


Hello all,

Last night I watched on local TV the 'going into service' announcement
of one of the two operators of the Greek cellular system. The
technology selected is GSM and the plan of coverage starts with the
Greater Athens area and will extend to major Greek cities by the end
of the year.  Prices mentioned were as follows: Start-up fee of $110,
monthly fee $45, peak hours cost per minute about $0.50. As for
terminals, three types are sold ($850-$1100!) by Motorola, Nokia and
Ericsson. It was not made clear, to me at least, if one could buy his
phone on the free market.

What I would like to ask our (European) readers is, given the digital
encryption in GSM, are fraud schemes of the type often mentioned in
this list (see #435) possible? Any data on the subject?  Remember, in
GSM subscription data is recorded in a credit-card sized SIM
(Subscriber Information Module) that plugs into the GSM phone; the
subscriber is uniquely identified by his IMSI (International Mobile
Subscriber Identity).


Vangelis Kontogiannis   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 15:36:50 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Bouncer
Organization: Mitech Corporation, Concord MA


In article <[e-mail]>, cyoung@virtual8.
harvard.edu (Cliff Young) writes:

> I spoke with a New England Telephone service rep today, and she stated
> that they are going forward with plans to implement caller ID in
> fifteen cities in Massachusetts.

> Can anyone confirm this?

I just visited last night the home of a guy who founded a start-up
that is now shipping a neat Caller-ID device called "The Bouncer."  He
was able to demonstrate the device at his home since Lincoln MA has
Caller-ID, right now.

It made me think differently about Caller-IDw. Here was an inexpensive
device that hooked up to the telephone line, your answering machine,
and especially your portable phone, and really solved a problem
without a lot of complex user-interface hair.

It just directed calls to different catagories (numbers of rings
before going to the answering machine, straight to the answering
machine, etc) based on the incoming number ID and/or lack of ID.

> I'm surprised that it made it through the Massachusetts legislature.

I was suprised too. It is a per-call ID-blocking system.


-gjc

------------------------------

Subject: Bad Directory Listings at C&P
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 93 13:42:01 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)


Here's an amazing story about telco screwups, summarized from an item
in the June 28 issue of TELEPHONY.

Dr. David Green, a Maryland dermatologist specializing in hair
transplants, is suing C&P Telephone for $5-million for seven years of
wrong listings in telephone directories.

C&P has filed a motion to limit its liability.  Their standard
contract limits their exposure because of directory listing mistakes
to the amount paid for an ad or special listing, and a spokesman
characterizes Green's claims as exaggerated.

His troubles began in 1985 when he contracted with C&P for a bold
listing in the White Pages, and then discovered that the telco had
listed a wrong number.  Despite beginning what became a seven-year
odyssey of phone calls, letters, and meetings with various C&P reps,
the mistake remained in the 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989 directories.

In 1988 Green began advertising in the Yellow Pages, and discovered
that both White and Yellow Pages listings gave an incorrect phone
number and address.  This error was repeated in the 1989 editions.

Meanwhile, patients attempting to reach him reached a recording saying
the number had been disconnected.

Green met with telco representatives who told him that the number
would be forwarded to the correct one, but it never happened.

In 1990 he discovered that he and his clinic had been completely
omitted from the Yellow Pages, and the White Pages again listed an
incorrect address and phone number.

After more complaints, Green said his ad was reinstated in the 1991
Yellow Pages, but listed again with a wrong number.  His White Pages
listing showed a different disconnected number.

Callers dialing Directory Assistance through August, 1992 were told
that no listing existed for his clinic, and in many instances were
given a number for a competitor.

Green claims that correct listings only started appearing last August,
one month after he filed suit.

"As a physician, my practice is completely dependent on the phone,"
Green says.  "For six or seven years now, its been real hard to make
contact with my office."


Can anyone top this??


[e-mail]  (if it bounces, use [e-mail])
Tad Cook     |  Packet Amateur Radio:  |  Home Phone:
Seattle, WA  |  KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA |  206-527-4089

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: Modem/Fax Fixture For Cellphones (Europe)
Oate: Thu, 01 Jul 1993 09:23:56 GMT


Recently I failed in my research of a cell phone which has a suitable
interface for modem/fax or external answering machine connection. In
the era of portable computing it seemed obvious to me that such
cell-phones/interface should have existed. Some are being planned, or
available on catalogues, but not distributed yet in Italy.

I would appreciate receiving information on the availability of such
interfaces (model number, and price in your currency) for major brand
cellular phones, since it might be possible to buy the interface
abroad (just the interface), if the cellular set is available in Italy
(e.g models from Motorola, Nokia, OKI, Ericson, etc.). I would like
not to buy the car-boster/kit to have this feature, but rather have it
for use with a laptop PC outside the car.

Any information, especially from Italian or European readers will be
appreciated. Thanks. Please email directly.


 Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Bull HN Italia, I-20010 Pregnana Mil.
 work:     [e-mail]   personal: [e-mail]
 phone:    [phone] / 8427 | fax: 8289

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: Time Signals via Modem
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1993 09:07:44 GMT


I am writing software which would get the (atomic) time signal from
sources which deliver that via modem. Is there a list of phone numbers
which offers this service worldwide available, together with the an
explanation of the time-code string transmitted?  I have developed a
program which gets the time from the IEN site in Torino, Italy, but
would like to add the possibility to use other "servers". This
software works on a PC compatible, and I have plans to release it to
the public domain, once I can insert more than one server
compatibility.

If you are interested in getting the specs for the IEN server, or a
copy of the software, or better have info on such servers in your area
pse email directly. Thank You.


 Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Bull HN Italia, I-20010 Pregnana Mil.
 work:     [e-mail]   personal: [e-mail]
 phone:    [phone] / 8427 | fax: 8289

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (J. Eric Townsend)
Subject: Sigh -- is This an Area-Code Change Problem?
Organization: NAS/NASA-Ames Research Center
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1993 19:20:14 GMT


I get about a call a week for Gravis, the people who make meecees and
a ton of other PC crap. At least one of their numbers is 604.431.1xxx.
The caller is usually in San Francisco proper (part of the 415 area
code).  My work number is 415.604.4311.

I suspect what is happening is that there's an older switch somewhere
that sees the '1604', decides 'hey, that person doesn't need to dial a
one to get to the 604 exchange, I'll just route it thru', and ignores
the trailing three digits of the Gravis #.

Am I in the right ballpark as to what is happening?  A better question
is: what do I do about it?


J. Eric Townsend [e-mail] 415.604.4311| personal email goes to:
CM-5 Administrator, Parallel Systems Support  |   [e-mail]
NASA Ames Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation    |---------------------------
PGP2.2 public key available upon request or finger [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1993 11:11:00
Subject: Net Safari '93


        Hello, some friends and I are looking into the idea of
spending next spring break driving a van around cross country to visit
sites of interest on the internet and USEnet.  One of the wilder
proposals we have is to try to obtain corporate sponsorships to make
promotional videos and other materials in connection with this trip;
in that case, we'd be interested in obtaining some kind of mobile
internet connection.  Since there are quite a few companies out there
that could really benefit from turning people on to the internet, we
think this might work.

        Anyway, we are at a feasability study stage on this, and I'd
like to invite any comments [by email] from anyone out there who might
have something to offer.  I'm primarily interested in

1)      What are the neat places to visit?
2)      Who might be interested in sponsoring such a trip for
        promotional value,  and how can I contact them?
3)      What kind of equipment and services could best be used to
        keep a van in USENET and/or Internet contact?  UUCP from pay
        phones?  Satellites?  A cellular phone SLIP line?


 Origin: NETIS [phone]/432-0922 (HST/V32) (1:132/189)

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Gnocchi al Telefono
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 04:01:06 GMT


While dining at a nearby Italian eatery, I noticed a rather peculiar
pasta dish on the menu:

             Gnocchi al Telefono

which I proceeded to order.  It was quite good gnocchi, but I'm
curious as to what exactly the origin of the name is.

I was hoping it would be garnished with a Motorola cellular, or at
least a trusty WECO 2500 which I would be entitled to take home.
Alas, only parsley and a little basil.


      Gabe Wiener -- [e-mail] -- N2GPZ

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Jul 93 08:56:39 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Why -48V on Local Loop?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) writes:

> When I read the articles about telephony, they all said that the
> voltage used on subscriber is -48V. But from the viewpoint of power,
> it's not very economical for system. Does anyone know the reason why
> telephone company chose the value as standard? I think that -10V is
> enough to drive a telephone line.

   I don't understand your reasoning that 48V would be less economical
than 10V.  Assuming the same total power (watts) has to be delivered
to the subscriber's instrument, higher voltages save lots of money in
resistance losses.  But there are a lot of other reasons for choosing
-48V.

   To begin with, the CO battery voltage was whatever it took to make
the customer's telephone's work -- if you used iron wire over long
distances, it took more voltage than copper in a "town" environment.
But over time, 24 volts seemed to become a standard.  For one thing,
at around 10 volts, the switchboard lamp took about 150 mA to be
bright enough to see well.  They also burned out faster that at the
24V, 80 mA level.  Also, when the improved switchboards with line
relays appeared (to allow a fixed voltage to be applied to the lamp,
regardless of distance from the board), 24 volts seemed to be about
the minimum needed for reliable relay operation at longer distances
(say, a couple of miles).

   As telephones started being placed further away, it was necessary
to provide more power on the line (to get the 25-30 mA needed for
early carbon microphones, even with loud talking).  Also, thicker wire
used on longer lines was expensive, and higher voltages were easily
provided by adding another battery in series (24V + 24V = 48V).  In
fact, inter-board calls usually used the batteries from both boards in
series to power the "trunk" between them as well as both lines.

   For 24V lines and 25 mA microphones, the loop had to be less than
24/.025 = 1000 ohms.  Allowing for 100+ ohms in the telephone plus the
CO circuits, the design limit was 875 ohms.  For 26 gauge wire, that's
about 2 miles; 19 gauge (5 times more copper) would support about 10
miles.

   Another concern was ringing voltage; for the ringers in telephones,
the AC voltage needed on longer lines went from 80V up to 105V.  AC
was usually stacked on top of the DC, so off-hook could be detected
during the AC part of ringing.  With all the concern about the danger
of higher AC voltages, this sort of limited the distance over which a
line could economically operate to about 20 miles.  But 24V even over
19 gauge would only support 10 miles.  Another reason to go with 48V.

   For 48V (nominal 50V) lines and the 23 mA improved microphone in
the 500 type set, the equation for line losses changed.  50V/.023 =
2174 ohms, and even allowing for 200 ohms in the other parts of the
circuit, the loop resistance could now go up to 2000 ohms!!  BUT the
new panel/SXS switches were designed to work with more than 23 mA, so
another tradeoff was made.  Limit the loop to 1200 ohms, put in some
battery resistance (see next paragraph) and use the extra current for
a 2dB gain in voice power.  So people could talk more quietly (even
bankers were using the telephone, and talking loud was not permitted),
and the quality also improved.  Even with this compromise, 48V
permitted 15 miles loops.  Later, ESS would support 1800 ohm loops to
about 18 miles, with proper loading.

   With 48V power came another problem: shorted lines.  So the
batteries were designed to offer about 400 ohms resistance to limit
short circuits to 120 mA -- this prevented the heat coils (designed to
trip at about 30 seconds of 500 mA) from tripping and having to be
manually reset.  The heat coils were in place to detect a real concern
of the time -- 120V AC power lines falling onto the telephone lines
that were on the same or nearby poles.

   Another advantage with 48V was the higher immunity to interference
from those power lines, electric trains and crosstalk.  And, of
course, the reason for the negative voltage: It prevents the
electroplating of copper in the presence of moisture, and helps
prevent contact corrosion from moisture.

   Pretty much from memory, so it's bound to be wrong somewhere ...


Al Varney -- just my opinion

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #437
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08220;
          2 Jul 93 18:59 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07385
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 2 Jul 1993 16:36:42 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23335
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 2 Jul 1993 16:36:06 -0500
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 16:36:06 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #438

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 2 Jul 93 16:35:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 438

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Digital Signature Scandal (info-gnu via Monty Solomon)
    Two AT&T Questions (Paul R. Coen)
    Caller ID via 800 number (Russ Latham)
    Voice Dialing Coming to New England (Dan Pearl)
    Which Long Distance Carriers Are Truly "Major"? (Toby Nixon)
    MCI Video Service Offerings (Jason Scott Steinhorn)
    1-800-OPERATOR: AT&T Automated Collect Calling (A. Alan Toscano )
    127 Years Ago (Matt Healy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 04:37:24 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital Signature Scandal


[Moderator's Note: Monty passed this along to us FYI.   PAT]

   From: [e-mail] (Noah Friedman)
   Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 16:30:21 edt
   To: [e-mail]
   Subject: Digital Signature Scandal


[The following is an official announcement from the League for Programming
Freedom.  Please redistribute this as widely as possible.]

           Digital Signature Scandal

Digital signature is a technique whereby one person (call her J. R.
Gensym) can produce a specially encrypted number which anyone can
verify could only have been produced by her.  (Typically a particular
signature number encodes additional information such as a date and
time or a legal document being signed.)  Anyone can decrypt the number
because that can be done with information that is published; but
producing such a number uses a "key" (a password) that J. R. Gensym
does not tell to anyone else.

Several years ago, Congress directed the NIST (National Institute of
Standards and Technology, formerly the National Bureau of Standards)
to choose a single digital signature algorithm as a standard for the
US.

In 1992, two algorithms were under consideration.  One had been
developed by NIST with advice from the NSA (National Security Agency),
which engages in electronic spying and decoding.  There was widespread
suspicion that this algorithm had been designed to facilitate some
sort of trickery.

The fact that NIST had applied for a patent on this algorithm
engendered additional suspicion; despite their assurances that this
would not be used to interfere with use of the technique, people could
imagine no harmless motive for patenting it.

The other algorithm was proposed by a company called PKP, Inc., which
not coincidentally has patents covering its use.  This alternative had
a disadvantage that was not just speculation: if this algorithm were
adopted as the standard, everyone using the standard would have to pay
PKP.

(The same patents cover the broader field of public key cryptography,
a technique whose use in the US has been mostly inhibited for a decade
by PKP's assiduous enforcement of these patents.  The patents were
licensed exclusively to PKP by the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and Stanford University, and derive from taxpayer-funded
research.)

PKP, Inc. made much of the suspect nature of the NIST algorithm and
portrayed itself as warning the public about this.

On June 8, NIST published a new plan which combines the worst of both
worlds: to adopt the suspect NIST algorithm, and give PKP, Inc. an
*exclusive* license to the patent for it.  This plan places digital
signature use under the control of PKP through the year 2010.

By agreeing to this arrangement, PKP, Inc. shows that its concern to
protect the public from possible trickery was a sham.  Its real desire
was, as one might have guessed, to own an official national standard.
Meanwhile, NIST has justified past suspicion about its patent
application by proposing to give that patent (in effect) to a private
entity.

Instead of making a gift to PKP, Inc., of the work all of us have paid
for, NIST and Congress ought to protect our access to it -- by
pursuing all possible means, judicial and legislative, to invalidate
or annull the PKP patents.  If that fails, even taking them by eminent
domain is better (and cheaper in the long run!) than the current plan.

You can write to NIST to object to this giveaway.  Write to:

Michael R. Rubin
Active Chief Counsel for Technology
Room A-1111, Administration Building,
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
[phone].

The deadline for arrival of letters is around August 4.

Please send a copy of your letter to:

League for Programming Freedom
1 Kendall Square #143
P.O.Box 9171
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139

(The League for Programming Freedom is an organization which defends
the freedom to write software, and opposes monopolies such as patented
algorithms and copyrighted languages.  It advocates returning to the
former legal system under which if you write the program, you are free
to use it.  Please write to the League if you want more information.)

Sending copies to the League will enable us to show them to elected
officials if that is useful.

This text was transcribed from a fax and may have transcription
errors.  We believe the text to be correct but some of the numbers
may be incorrect or incomplete.

                      ------------------

 ** The following notice was published in the Federal Register, Vol.
           58, No. 108, dated June 8, 1993 under Notices **

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Notice of Proposal for Grant of Exclusive Patent License

This is to notify the public that the National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST) intends to grant an exclusive world-wide license
to Public Key Partners of Sunnyvale, California to practice the
Invention embodied in U.S. Patent Application No.  07/738.431 and
entitled "Digital Signature Algorithm."  A PCT application has been
filed.  The rights in the invention have been assigned to the United
States of America.

The prospective license is a cross-license which would resolve a
patent dispute with Public Key Partners and includes the right to
sublicense.  Notice of availability of this invention for licensing
was waived because it was determined that expeditious granting of such
license will best serve the interest of the Federal Government and the
public.  Public Key Partners has provided NIST with the materials
contained in Appendix A as part of their proposal to NIST.

Inquiries, comments, and other materials relating to the prospec- tive
license shall be submitted to Michael R. Rubin, Active Chief Counsel
for Technology, Room A-1111, Administration Building, National
Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899.
His telephone number is [phone].  Applications for a license
filed in response to this notice will be treated as objections to the
grant of the prospective license.

Only written comments and/or applications for a license which are
received by NIST within sixty (60) days for the publication of this
notice will be considered.

The prospective license will be granted unless, within sixty (60) days
of this notice, NIST receives written evidence and argument which
established that the grant of the license would not be consistent with
the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

  Dated:  June 2, 1993.

Raymond G. Kammer
Acting Director, National Institute Standards and Technology.

Appendix "A"

The National Institute for Standards and Technology ("NIST") has
announced its intention to grant Public Key Partners ("PKP")
sublicensing rights to NIST's pending patent application on the
Digital Signature Algorithm ("DSA").

Subject to NIST's grant of this license, PKP is pleased to declare its
support for the proposed Federal Information Processing Standard for
Digital Signatures (the "DSS") and the pending availability of
licenses to practice the DSA.  In addition to the DSA, licenses to
practice digital signatures will be offered by PKP under the following
patents:

          Cryptographic Apparatus and Method ("Diffie-Hellman")
                No. 4,200,770
          Public Key Cryptographic Apparatus and Method
        ("Hellman-Merkle")   No. 4,315,552
          Exponential Cryptographic Apparatus and Method
                ("Hellman-Pohlig")   No. 4,434,414
          Method For Identifying Subscribers And For Generating
        And Verifying Electronic Signatures In A Data Exchange
                System ("Schnorr")   No. 4,995,082

It is PKP's intent to make practice of the DSA royalty free for
personal, noncommercial and U.S. Federal, state and local government
use.  As explained below, only those parties who enjoy commercial
benefit from making or selling products, or certifying digital
signatures, will be required to pay royalties to practice the DSA.

PKP will also grant a license to practice key management, at no
additional fee, for the integrated circuits which will implement both
the DSA and the anticipated Federal Information Processing Standard
for the "key escrow" system announced by President Clinton on April
16, 1993.

Having stated these intentions, PKP now takes this opportunity to
publish its guidelines for granting uniform licenses to all parties
having a commercial interest in practicing this technology:

First, no party will be denied a license for any reason other that the
following:

          (i)    Failure to meet its payment obligations,
          (ii)   Outstanding claims of infringement, or
          (iii)  Previous termination due to material breach.

Second, licenses will be granted for any embodiment sold by the
licensee or made for its use, whether for final products software, or
compfinal products software, or components such as integrated circuits
and boards, and regard- less of the licensee's channel of distribution.
Provided the requisite royalties have been paid by the seller on the
enabling component(s), no further royalties will be owned by the buyer
for making or selling the final product which incorporates such
components.

Third, the practice of digital signatures in accordance with the DSS
may be licensed separately from any other technical art covered by
PKP's patents.

Fourth, PKP's royalty rates for the right to make or sell products,
subject to uniform minimum fees, will be no more than 2 1/2% for
hardware products and 5% for software, with the royalty rate further
declining to 1% on any portion of the product price exceeding $1,000.
These royalty rates apply only to noninfringing parties and will be
uniform without regard to whether the licensed product creates digital
signatures, verifies digital signatures or performs both.

Fifth, for the next three (3) years, all commercial services which
certify a signature's authenticity for a fee may be operated royalty
free.  Thereafter, all providers of such commercial certification
services shall pay a royalty to PKP of $1.00 per certificate for each
year the certificate is valid.

Sixth, provided the foregoing royalties are paid on such products or
services, all other practice of the DSA shall be royalty free.

Seventh, PKP invites all of its existing licensees, at their option,
to exchange their current licenses for the standard license offered
for DSA.

Finally, PKP will mediate the concerns of any party regarding the
availability of PKP's licenses for the DSA with designated
representatives of NIST and PKP.  For copies of PKP's license terms,
contact Michael R. Rubin, Acting Chief Counsel for Technology, NIST,
or Public Key Partners.

  Dated:  June 2, 1993.

Robert B. Fougner, Esq.,
Director of Licensing, Public Key Partners,
310 North Mary Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA  94033

[FR Doc. 93-13473 Filed 8-7-93; 8:45 am]


Forwarded by:

Jim Gillogly   Trewesday, 21 Forelithe S.R. 1993, 20:56

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 13:36:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul R. Coen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Two AT&T Questions
Organization: Drew University Academic Computing


My first question is about the "evening plus" from AT&T.  For those
who aren't familiar with it, you pay 7.50 a month for the first hour
of evening calls (standard AT&T evening/weekend rate times).  After
that, evening calls are ten cents/minute.  You get a five percent
discount on all in-state, direct-dialed AT&T calls long distance and
international calls as well.

My understanding is that Reach Out America is 8.50 a month for the
first hour, and then evening calls are something like 12.5
cents/minute.

Since I make 99.9% of my calls during evening calling hours anyway,
this looks like a no-brainer -- the "Evening Plus" plan looks better.
Am I missing something?  Are there plans I haven't heard of?

My second question is on the status of the AT&T Pay Phone (Public
Phone?  I always forget) 2000 -- I was at PC Expo, and of course, they
were sill dead as far as the data functions went.  (I used one when I
was in the Javits Convention Center last November.  Nice service.
Crummy VT-100 emulation though.  The worst I've seen in a while.
Maybe the worst I've ever seen, in fact).  Is AT&T likely to get
authorization for these things?  (Actually, I don't even see why they
need permission to offer the service.  Nothing is stopping the RBOC's,
COCOT's, Sprint, and MCI from getting into this game either, is
there?)

It just blows my mind that in this day of glowing talk of "data
services" and "superhighways," the closest thing offered to some sort
of convenient public data access (at a reasonable rate, as well) has
to be disabled.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Russ Latham)
Subject: Caller ID via 800 Number
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 15:18:03 -0600 (CDT)


With the recent posting of the 800 number that reads back the number
you are calling from [800-235-1414], I was wondering about the
following:

You have an 800 number with ANI, and let's say you live in an area
that doesn't have Caller-ID yet.  If you were receiving harrassing
calls on your residential line, could you call-forward that
residential number to the 800 number, and then take the calls from
there and determine who was calling you?

If this does work, would it also work in the case where a person did
Caller-ID blocking before they made the call? (Assuming Caller-ID
services were available in the residential area.)

One final question.  What is required for 800 ANI?  Is it similar to
how current Caller-ID works, with the attachment of an additional box
to your phone line?


Thanks,

russ latham   [e-mail]
motorola, inc   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Most ANI is supplied on a delayed basis, with your
bill at the end of the month. It can be supplied at the time the call
is delivered, but this does not happen too often except in the case of
very large customers. It is not really cost-effective  for the small
business and residential users of 800 service. If you get 'real-time'
ANI, it comes in on a circuit from the carrier; it is up to take it
and deal with it however you want. I think call forwarding a phone to
an 800 number -- if that is possible, some telcos may have it blocked
as a legitimate call forwarding number -- would produce for ANI purposes
only the number doing the forwarding.  I am not sure. What you are
suggesting is IMHO a very convoluted approach to solving the problem
of harassing phone calls you cannot identify.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 93 10:08:20 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dan Pearl)
Subject: Voice Dialing Coming to New England


I heard on WBZ this morning that a voice-dialing service is coming to
selected exchanges in the New England Telephone service area.  You
need only say the name of the party you wish to call, and the voice-
recognition software in the switch does the rest.

I assume that you have to train the switch first!

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Toby Nixon)
Subject: Which Long Distance Carriers Are Truly "Major"?
Date: 02 Jul 93 18:49:06 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation, Redmond WA, USA


As I've previously mentioned in this space, I'm program manager for
Windows Telephony. One of the features of this product will be "number
translation"; automatic inclusion of proper prefixes, suffixes, and
other dialing procedures for both direct-dialed and calling-card
calls, based on location and many other factors. One of the things we
want to do is pre-package calling card dialing procedures for all of
the "major" long distance carriers in the USA (plus, in internation-
alized versions, dialing procedures for the phone systems in other
countries which support calling card dialing via DTMF rather than
verbal interaction with an operator).  Obviously, AT&T, MCI, and
Sprint fall into the category of "major", as would the local exchange
carriers for intra-lata toll calls (although the LECs are only
generally only accessible as 0+ dialing and not 10xxx, 800, or 950, so
they're simpler).

What other IXCs would readers of this newsgroup consider to be
"major"?  Will AT&T, MCI, Sprint, and LEC calling cards cover 99+% of
Windows users?  Windows Telephony will include the ability for users
to define dialing procedures for other carriers, but we'd like to
include and test dialing rules for any other carriers that have a
significant customer base.  Of course, we'll be doing market research
here, but I think it's always good to check those raw facts and
figures against the impressions held by real users in the real world
 -- and I don't think there's a better base of experience in this area
than comp.dcom.telecom.

Your advice would be much appreciated!  Thanks!


Toby Nixon    Program Manager - Windows Telephony   Microsoft Corporation

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jason Scott Steinhorn)
Subject: MCI Video Service Offerings
Date: 2 Jul 1993 16:50:43 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, Communication Services


I'm looking for information about the available Video Services offered
by MCI.  If anyone has any information about any specific services
offered, please let me know.


Thanks,

Jason Scott Steinhorn                  [e-mail]
Dept. of Communication Services          Work:  405-4471
University of Maryland, College Park       Home:  314-3999

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (A Alan Toscano )
Date: 2 Jul 93 16:57:32 GMT
Subject: 1-800-OPERATOR: AT&T Automated Collect Calling


Did you forget your "debit" calling card at home? Not to worry --
another method of travel calling is heating up: Calling Collect!

AT&T has placed 1-800-OPERATOR into service for collect calling,
ostensibly to compete with MCI's similar "1-800-COLLECT From MCI"
service. (Ironically, until 800 Portability arrived, AT&T's new
number, equivalent to 1 800 673-7286, fell into MCI's number space.)

Unlike MCI's service, AT&T's will, within a few weeks, utilize
speech-recognition technology. From their Press Release:

     Initially, operators will answer calls to 1-800-OPERATOR.
     After mid-July, the service will feature automated call
     servicing, using speech-recognition technology developed
     by AT&T Bell Laboratories. Callers may use 1-800-OPERATOR
     at any phone and receive a discount on their collect calls.
     If a caller reaches the automated system and chooses to
     use an operator to complete the call, standard collect-call
     rates will apply.

AT&T and MCI are both having "ten cents per minute" promotions on July
4th.  Aside from these one-day, promotional, rates, the Press Release
is vague about the service's cost, stating only that: "Collect calls
made by dialing 1-800-OPERATOR will match or better the everyday
state-to-state collect-call prices of major long-distance companies."


A Alan Toscano -- Houston, TX -- <[e-mail]>
Disclaimer: I am not an AT&T employee. I'm just a customer.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (matt healy)
Subject: 127 Years Ago
Organization: Yale Med School--Genetics
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 14:42:27 GMT


On 27 July 1866, the first successful Transatlantic Telegraph Cable
began commercial operation, after a decade-long series of failures.
On its first day of operation, it earned about 1000 Pounds Sterling in
revenues -- for a 9 bit per second channel!  Imagine the cost per
megabyte of downloading ...


Matt Healy    [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #438
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15499;
          3 Jul 93 2:31 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18618
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 00:15:47 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19612
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 00:15:12 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 00:15:12 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #439

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 00:15:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 439

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CPSR Workplace Privacy Testimony (Dave Banisar)
    Western Union Says Opiniongrams Work (Nigel Allen)
    Power Crosses Phone Lines (was: Why -48V on Local Loop?) (Andy Rabagliati)
    Networked Notebooks (was: Net Safari '93) (Frederick Roeber)
    New West Pacific Cable; Other Singapore Telecom News (Wm Randolph Franklin)
    Refunds and Fraud (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Premium Services in Israel (David Lemson)
    Wanted: Information on Public Carriers (Nadeem Haider)
    Cellular Carriers Want 500 Code (Les Reeves)
    Urgent Help Needed, My Cellular Phone is Locked (Kashif M. Akhtar)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Organization: CPSR Civil Liberties and Computing Project
From: Dave Banisar <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 16:00:05 EST
Subject: CPSR Workplace Privacy Testimony


                 Prepared Testimony
                           and
                Statement for the Record
                            of
                     Marc Rotenberg,
           Director, CPSR Washington office,
  Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University Law Center
                            on
                        H.R. 1900,
       The Privacy for Consumers and Workers Act

                          Before
    The Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations,
           Committee on Education and Labor,
             U.S. House of Representatives
                      June 30, 1993

    Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, thank for the
opportunity to testify today on H.R. 1900, the Privacy for Consumers
and Workers Act.  My name is Marc Rotenberg and I am the director of
the CPSR Washington office and an adjunct professor at Georgetown
University Law Center where I teach a course on information privacy
law.

    Speaking on behalf of CPSR, we strongly endorse the Privacy
for Consumers and Workers Act.  The measure will establish important
safeguards for workers and consumers in the United States.  We believe
that H.R. 1900 is particularly important as our country becomes more
dependent on computerized information systems and the risk of privacy
abuse increases.

    CPSR has a special interest in workplace privacy.  For almost
a decade we have advocated for the design of computer systems that
better serve the needs of employees in the workplace.  We do not view
this particular goal as a trade-off between labor and management.  It
is our belief that computer systems and information policies that are
designed so as to value employees will lead to a more productive work
environment and ultimately more successful companies and
organizations.  As Charles Hecksher of the Harvard Business School has
said good managers have no use for secret monitoring.

    Equally important is the need to ensure that certain
fundamental rights of employees are safeguarded.  The protection of
personal privacy in the information age may be as crucial for American
workers as the protection of safety was in the age of machines.
Organizations that fail to develop appropriate workplace privacy
policies leave employees at risk of abuse, embarrassment, and
harassment.

    The concern about workplace privacy is widely felt in the
computer profession.  This month MacWorld magazine, a leading
publication in the computer industry, released a special report on
workplace privacy.  The report, based on a survey of 301 companies in
the United States and authored by noted science writer Charles Piller,
made clear the need for a strong federal policy.

    Among the key findings of the MacWorld survey:

> More than 21 percent of those polled said that they had "engaged in
searches of employee computer files, voice mail, electronic mail, or
other networking communications."

> "Monitoring work flow" is the most frequently cited reason for
electronic searches.

> In two out of three cases, employees are not warned about electronic
searches.

> Only one third of the companies surveyed have a written policy on
privacy.

    What is also interesting about the MacWorld survey is the high
level of concern expressed by top corporate managers about electronic
monitoring.  More than a half of those polled said that electronic
monitoring was either "never acceptable" or "usually or always
counterproductive."  Less than five percent believed that electronic
monitoring was a good tool to routinely verify honesty.

    These numbers suggest that managers would support a sensible
privacy law.  Indeed, they are consistent with other privacy polls
conducted by Professor Alan Westin for the Lou Harris organization
which show that managers are well aware of privacy concerns and may,
with a little prodding, agree to sensible policies.

    What would such a policy look like?  The MacWorld report also
includes a model privacy policy that is based on several U.S. and
international privacy codes.  Here are the key elements:

> Employees should know what electronic surveillance tools are used,
and how management will use the data gathered.

> Management should minimize electronic monitoring as much as
possible.  Continuous monitoring should not be permitted.

> Data should only be used for clearly defined, work-related purposes.

> Management should not engage in secret monitoring unless there is
credible evidence of criminal activity or serious wrongdoing.

> Data gathered through monitoring should not be the sole factor in
employee evaluations.

> Personal information gathered by employers should not be disclosed
to any third parties, except to comply with legal requirements.

> Employees or prospective employees should not be asked to waive
privacy rights.

> Managers who violate these privacy principles should be subject to
discipline or termination.

    Many of these provisions are contained in H.R.  1900, the
Privacy for Consumers and Workers Act.  Clearly, the policies and the
bill itself are not intended to prohibit monitoring, nor to prevent
employers from protecting their business interests.  What the bill
will do is help establish a clear framework that ensures employees are
properly notified of monitoring practices, that personal information
is not misused, and that monitoring capability is not abused.  It is a
straightforward, sensible approach that does not so much balance
rights as it clarifies interests and ensures that both employers and
employees will respect appropriate limitations on monitoring
capability.

    The need to move quickly to establish a framework for
workplace privacy protection is clear.  Privacy problems will become
more acute in the years ahead as new monitoring schemes are developed
and new forms of personal data are collected.  As Professor Gary Marx
has made clear, there is little that can be imagined in the monitoring
realm that can not be achieved.  Already, some members of the computer
profession are wearing "active badges" that provide full-time
geographical monitoring.  Properly used, these devices help employees
use new tools in the hi-tech workplace.  Improperly used, such devices
could track the physical movements of an employee throughout the day,
almost like a blip on a radar screen.

    Computers are certainly powerful tools.  We believe that they
can be used to improve productivity and increase job satisfaction.
But this requires that appropriate policies be developed to address
employee concerns and that laws be passed, when necessary, to ensure
that computer abuse does not occur.

    This concludes my testimony.  I would be pleased to answer
your questions.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 01:48:34 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Western Union Says Opiniongrams Work
Organization: Echo Beach
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Here is a press release issued on behalf of Western Union Financial
Services, Inc.  I downloaded the press release from the PR On-Line BBS
in Maryland at 410-363-0834. I assume that Earle Palmer Brown is a
company that serves as Western Union's public relations advisors.

The survey makes no mention of the relative impact of faxes or e-mail
messages. A handful of members of the U.S. House of Representatives
have Internet addresses.

 Survey Shows That Opiniongram Telegrams Have Impact on Capitol Hill
 To: Business Desk, Political Writers
 Contact: Peter Engel of Earle Palmer Brown, 212-463-6914

   UPPER SADDLE RIVER, N.J., June 30 -- A survey of 79 senior
Congressional aides revealed that 84 percent consider the Opiniongram
message -- a personalized telegram to elected federal and state
officials -- to carry great weight and credibility, as well as
significant importance in communicating the views and wishes of
constituents.

   The survey, conducted in May for Western Union Financial Services
Inc., was designed to determine the most effective ways in which to
communicate with elected officials.  Among the key findings:

   -- 84 percent considered the Opiniongram message to have great
importance both in terms of conveying the opinions of constituents and
influencing the views of a representative, giving it equal or greater
importance than the personal letter;

   -- Congressional aides recommend that written communications be
brief, personalized, sent in a timely manner, stick to one issue and
reflect the constituent's knowledge of that issue;

   -- Opiniongram telegrams are regarded by Congressional staff
members as high priority items because of their brevity, timeliness
and the care and commitment that the constituent shows to an issue by
sending one;

   -- Opiniongram telegrams require a written response -- by contrast,
telephone calls, which were cited as the second most frequent form of
communication (44 percent), do not require any response by elected
officials;

  -- Only 40 percent of Congressional staff surveyed pay any
significant attention to form letters or postcards;

   -- The key groups who are frequent communicators with Congress are
senior citizens (48 percent), followed by Pro-Life/Religious Right (15
percent), special interest groups (14 percent) and environmentalists
(11 percent).  General or across-the-board opinions made up 15
percent.

   -- Congressmen and senators send telegrams for special occasions or
events because it communicates immediacy and expresses special
attention and regard.

   "The results of this survey confirm what we had suspected for a
long time," said Elaine Bolle, senior vice president, Western Union.
"An Opiniongram telegram remains a highly effective method of
communicating one's viewpoint to elected officials -- it's timely,
personalized, to the point and it gets attention."

   In a matter of hours, Western Union's Opiniongram telegram service
reaches federal and state elected officials to express a constituent's
viewpoint on issues of public interest.

   Western Union Financial Services Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary
of New Valley Corp.  It provides Western Union Money Transfer services
throughout the world and also provides bill-payment and other
financial and messaging services to consumers and businesses in the
United States.

                          -----------

Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Western Union is desparately trying to stay in
business. I can't blame them, but the handwriting is on the wall. Just
yesterday I received a telegram from someone ... a real, actual
telegram. The message was important enough they wanted to contact me
ASAP. I had to feel embarassed for the sender in a way.  :(  It was a
much older person who contacted me by the way.  PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Power Crosses Phone Lines (was Why -48V on Local Loop?)
Organization: W.Z.I.
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 00:47:25 -0600
From: Andy Rabagliati <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:

> The heat coils were in place to detect a real concern of the time --
> 120V AC power lines falling onto the telephone lines that were on the
> same or nearby poles.

In the UK, any crossing of power lines over phone lines is treated
with great concern. Big netting arrangements are built, so that if the
power cables break they will still not touch phone lines.

When my parents moved into a house in Wiltshire and asked for phone
service, the phone company preferred to run poles and wires 10 miles
from Calne, a nearby town, than run 100 yds from the rest of the
village. Why?  Maybe they were out of circuits? But there were also
three phase power cables the phone lines had to cross.

(Wall sockets in the UK are 240V -- but the pole carried a transformer,
so power transmission is a higher voltage).

There are more phones now in the village than 20 years ago -- those
poles still only carry one set of wires.

Phone lines strung cross country are bare wires -- not the two inch
cables seen in the US.

Phone lines in town are ALWAYS buried.


Cheers,

Andy

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Frederick Roeber)
Subject: Networked Notebooks (was Net Safari '93)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CERN -- European Organization for Nuclear Research
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 09:18:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Paul Houle) writes:

> [...] we'd be interested in obtaining some kind of mobile
> internet connection.

TD readers might be interested in a paper, "The Little Work Project,"
Peter Honeyman et.al. of the University of Michigan.  It's on-line at
ftp://citi.umich.edu/afs/umich.edu/user/r/e/rees/pub/wwos3.ps.Z .

It describes a set of notebook computers they've put together with
Unix, a distributed file system, and network connectivity via cellular
phones.  A couple interesting paragraphs:

  "At this time, we are able to produce a fair approximation of the
  desktop work environment.  We have run the prototype from hotel
  rooms and airport lounges across the country, and one of us even
  took AMTRAK across he country with a Little Work prototype and the
  Outback portable cellular modem.

  "The trick is to wait for the train to approach a metropolitan area,
  where cellular service is usually available, establish a SLIP
  connection, pull mail down to the local disk and ship out any
  outbound messages queued up on the local disk.  (We use a distributed
  mail service based on a post-office protocol.)  When between cities,
  the new mail can be read at leisure and new messages composed.  It's
  actually pretty easy to get work done this way."


Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research
e-mail: [e-mail] or [e-mail] | work: [phone]
r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: [phone]
                http://info.cern.ch/roeber/fgmr.html

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Wm Randolph Franklin)
Subject: New West Pacific Cable; Other Singapore Telecom News
Date: 2 Jul 1993 16:47:59 +0800
Organization: Institute Of Systems Science, NUS.


A new 11000 km undersea fiber cable is being built from Singapore to
Korea and points between.  It'll have 660K voice channels and cost
US$610M.

Let's see, that's $900 capital cost per channel.  Assuming a 10 year
(=100K hour) life, that's $0.01 per hour.  Sure, I'm ignoring
maintenance, load factors, etc, etc.  However Singapore charges in the
region of $100 per hour for international calls.  Not a bad profit
margin.  This is not to pick on one country; the stats for the TAT
(trans-Atlantic) cables, though not this one-sided, are also
sickening.  (I think their capital costs might run about $1 per hour,
amortized.)

Other Singapore news:

1. Cellular phone ESN fraud has hit here;  several people have been
arrested.

2. There is a form of short-range portable phone; dunno the technical
details.

3. You can put a password on your line to disable international calls
unless the password is keyed in as part of the number.  Why can't
American companies do this?

4. The phone company has a book listing 976-type services in many
other countries.  I don't know what you pay.  Perhaps, as some other
messages mention in a related context, the provider gets only a cut of
the normal long distance fee.

USA Today's international version of their 900 number is like that.
The international edition gives a Hong Kong number, and states that
outside HK you pay only the normal LD fee.

Finally, if traveling know the MCI and Sprint versions of USA Direct,
as well as AT&T.  Sometimes one is busy for days.  This happened to me
in Italy last fall.


Wm. Randolph Franklin,  [e-mail], x2518, office: 3-18
 Visiting until Aug 9:
  Institute Of Systems Science, National University of Singapore
 From:
  [e-mail], [phone];  Fax: -6261
  ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA


[Moderator's Note: You *can* have authorization code required to
complete long distance dialing in the USA. The 1+ service I offer as a
product for readers here has authorization codes as an optional item
at no extra charge. Just ask for them. I can also block undesired area
codes or international calls by time of day, day of week, etc.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 12:29:31 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: Refunds and Fraud


With U.S. postage at 29 cents, and the cost of issuing and processing
the check, it costs perhaps $1 to refund anything.  That's why many
places (such as the tax collectors for federal, state and city) make
you check off a box for "mail me a refund even if it is less than $1".

There was a company in Hicksville NY famous for misleading advertising.

They'd have self referential ads ("nationally advertised teddy bear
for only $4.99") and a lot of sweepstakes.  They had a box for "don't
send the prize if under $1.00".  Well, $3,000 divided by 7,500 winners
= 0.40.  Yes, the usual prize was 40 cents, so checking that box ment
they could keep the prize.  I have not gotten any of these recently,
so I guess the postage increase killed it.  Pity :-)

I'm not saying that nobody should refund things that are under $1,
just that it is not cost effective.  I quite agree that with the
original poster that phone companies are responsible for properly
billing calls and should refund any unjust enrighment (such as
collecting the coins and not crediting you).  When I get my ITT
calling card bill for $0.36, I pay it since I cannot say to them "I
don't bother paying bills under $1.".  So I agree, nobody should get
away with the cry of "we don't pay under $1."

Re: Judge Tashima and cellular fraud:

Since the judge ruled that the ESN is not private, why not let him
have a taste of his own medicine and publish his ESN for all to hack.
Oh, let me guess, he doesn't have a cellular phone, so he has no
personal concern for those that do.  Just wait for the day he gets one
and becomes responsible for the bill :-) I'm not condoning fraud, just
that people should be accountable for their actions and understand
their repercussions.


Jeffrey Jonas     [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Lemson)
Subject: Premium Services in Israel
Date: 2 Jul 1993 17:17:07 -0500
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Here in Israel (never mind the .signature or e-mail address, I am
'virtually' connected) They have a pay-per-minute class of services
that start with the nmumber 056- (it sems like a city code, but there
is no city with that code).  They have the whole spectrum of services,
like horoscope, sports, chat lines, etc.

What's interesting is that the direct lines to the service providers
have been known in certain circles recently. (you might call it
phreakers in the US, as it is technically defrauding the service
providers.) These are the lines from the phone company, Bezek, to the
provider -- that means that you can get the services in question for
the price of a regular phone call.

What's even more interesting is that a newspaper published a big story
about it including many of the numbers two weeks ago.  That's one way
to send the 900 providers out of business.


David Lemson                                                  [phone]
University of Illinois Computing & Comm Services Office System Administrator
Internet : [e-mail]                  UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson
NeXTMail & MIME accepted                             BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 93 13:21:28 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Nadeem Haider)
Subject: Wanted: Information on Public Carriers
Organization: Nova University, FL


Can anyone recommend how I may go about finding information on public
carriers?

I need information (hardware required, procedures, etc..) on setting
up communication links for a dedicated WAN.  I forsee using dedicated
leased lines and would like to know who are the major players in the
service provider game.

Any information will be greatly appreciated.


Thanks,

nadeem    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 01:31:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Carriers Want 500 Code


* In response to 11 companies that have expressed an urgent need for
sanctioning the 500-series access code, the North American Numbering
Plan (NANPA), which is part of Bellcore, has asked the FCC to comply.
The companies include Sprint, AT&T, MCI, American Mobile Satellite,
American Personal Communications, Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems,
BellSouth Mobile Systems, GTE Mobile, GTE Telephone, McCaw, Pacific
Bell PacTel Cellular and U S West New Vector Group.  NANPA Director
Ronald Conners said if the FCC "doesn't act by August 1," the process
of reviewing specific requests for numbering will begin for "these and
other companies" that have urgent needs.  Conners said the companies
have worked cooperatively for several months to draft a Joint Position
Paper outlining why there is an urgent need for 500 assignment.
(Communications Daily, "Personal Communications Services industry to
be offered '500'-series numbers (Communications Daily, 6/28/93).

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Kashif M Akhtar)
Subject: Urgent Help Needed, My Cellular Phone is Locked
Date: 3 Jul 93 03:37:15 GMT
Organization: Mississippi State University


Dear netters,

     Only a few hours ago I bought myself an AudioVox MVX-500 from
Cellular South. It did work great for a while. After that I thought
I'd check all the nifty features of the beauty. Last paragraph on page
17 said I could electronically lock the cellular phone too and then
gave the instructions on doing so. I don't know what was I smoking and
since there were no warnings I went ahead and tried it. Lo and Behold,
the unit is locked. Nobody can make calls, not even me. I quickly
flipped the pages to find out on how to unlock it. To my
disappointment I found I am supposed to know a 3-digit unlock code,
which is same as code registered in the "NAM" ???????

    I can't contact Cellular South until Tuesday. I need to use the
unit during the long weekend. If any of you netters out there knows
the sloution to this problem, please drop me a line as soon as
possible. Thanks a lot.

    This unit is not stolen :) I'd be willing to fax my original
receipt and also send receipt number of this unit.

    Again, any help will be greatly appreciated. Please don't reply to
this email after Monday 5th July 1993. Thanks again.


Kashif M. Akhtar   Electrical Engineering   Mississippi State University
email : [e-mail]   Phone: [phone]  fax: [phone]


Moderator's Note: If you bought the phone Friday evening, you should
be able to go back to the dealer post-haste on Saturday morning and
get him to clear it out, or swap it for a different phone. Even if the
business office for the carrier is closed until Tuesday, there will be
personnel from credit and sales authorization around at the carrier's
office on Saturday part/most of the day. If the dealer swaps phones
for you (lacking the ability to just clean it all out and start over)
then someone from the carrier's office will swap the phone number you
were assigned out to the ESN in the replacement phone.  Good luck. I'd
say go *early* Saturday and plead for mercy with the dealer. If the
dealer is closed, go to one that is open; take all your paperwork and
be prepared (if another dealer) to have to pay $30-40.00  :(   PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #439
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16335;
          3 Jul 93 3:25 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29417
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 01:02:17 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26056
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 01:01:33 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 01:01:33 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #440

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 01:01:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 440

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Lines of Code in Switch Summary (Tom Streeter)
    Re: Maximum Number of Phone Lines to a Residence? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Maximum Number of Phone Lines to a Residence? (Scott A. Harris)
    Re: Sigh -- is This an Area-Code Change Problem? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Sigh -- is This an Area-Code Change Problem? (David W.Tamkin)
    Re: Sigh -- is This an Area-Code Change Problem? (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tom Streeter)
Subject: Lines of Code in Switch Summary
Date: 02 Jul 1993 14:55:31 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville


Below are excerpts of some of the responses I received to my question
"How many lines of code are in switch software?" that I asked as a
result of a thread in alt.technology.misc.  I'm posting this in a.t.m,
but also submitting it to TELECOM Digest since a number of people
asked if I would be doing so.  I didn't intend to submit it at first
because I wasn't sure there would be interest, but I stand corrected.

I'd like to thank all the folks who took the time to respond to my
question.  I've edited the responses for length.  If you should notice
an incomplete or misleading statement, flame me and not the respondent;
I might have well cut something important by mistake.  Some people were
kind enough to pass along information but for various reasons did not
wish to be identified, they also have my thanks.  I also received a
number of general comments about programming, 'Jurassic Park,' and the
nature of Usenet threads.  They were interesting, but I didn't think
they should be included.

And now, some of the responses:

[We lead off with Fun Facts about the DMS from Northern Telecom]

From: Albert Pang  <[e-mail]>

Much more than that.  The last time I went to a lecture given by Bell
Northern Research, the DMS-100 has 13 million lines of code a few years
ago.  I think it's approaching the 20 million lines.


Sender: [Did not wish to be identified]

I don't think it's any deep dark secret that the DMS family of CO
switches has >20M LOC (Lines of Code).  Yes, 20 million.  Other
switches in the NT family run anywhere from numbers in the hundreds of
thousands to the low millions (key systems to packet switches to
goodness knows only what).

How do they get that big?  Consider the standard rules of thumb in the
industry (these aren't necessarily our numbers, and they certainly
vary from project to project!, but they'll do for approximation
purposes): one designer produces 6K LOC fully debugged and documented
code per year.  DMS has been a product since the late 1970's; let's
say it has a history of 15 years.  Throw an average of say 500
designers per year at it (that's probably low) and you get
500*15*6=45000KLOC which is 45MLOC that those designers will have
produced over the years.  After all, that's what they are hired for.
:-) So in fact I'd say we've done quite well to keep reusability high,
or to actually throw out code that is no longer in use!


From: "Conrad (C.E.) Labonte" <[e-mail]>

To answer your quesiton, in the latest general release of software for
the Northern Telecom DMS, there are approximately 23M (yes, 23
million!) lines of code ... this is the total for low level firmware
(assembler), some offboard C code, PROTEL (custom language designed by
BNR), and PASCAL.  The latest realease was BCS34.  BCS35 is in trial
now, a new BCS normally available every six to nine months.  With each
BCS, the code has been growing by approximately 1M lines for the last
three years.  Reportedly, BNR claims that only NASA's space shuttle
has more code, (certainly much more than the four to five million
lines claimed for the 5ESS ... I've studied the 5ESS in some detail,
and believe the true figure to be closer to 12M lines)


[Two messages from Guy Turgeon put the punctuation mark on it]

From: [e-mail] (Guy Turgeon)

Just another interesting piece of information.

The DMS100 (centrex c.o.) developed by Northern Telecom is in the
Guinness Book of world records for the most lines of code.  The c.o.
has 26 million lines of code written in a proprietary language.

Truely amazing!

-Guy

From: [e-mail] (Guy Turgeon)

Sorry, make that 24 million lines.


[Now, on to the good folks at AT&T]


From: [e-mail]

To take a 5ESS as an example, there two million NSCL (Non-commentary
Source Code Lines) (roughly) of code for the UNIX-RTR alone.  There's
roughly five times that amount for the actual switch software.  This
includes, however, everything ranging from routing, to firmware, to
hardware diagnostics. So as an educated guess, total source code lines
(excluding comments) more than ten million.

BTW: I work in the 5ESS testing labs, so it is a good guess. I wasn't
able to find anyone who could give me a definate answer though, so
that goes to show the complexity of the whole thing!


From: [e-mail]

I have nothing to do with 5ESS development, but the _AT&T Technical
Journal_ had a special issue on software productivity a few years ago
(Vol. 69, No. 2, March/April 1990), in which they talked a bit about
it.  From p. 8:

    The 5ESS switch is a large development effort ... the software
    that controls the switch contains several million lines of
    code.  Incremental software releases can add several hundred
    thousand lines of code and require hundreds of staff-years to
    develop.

And an interesting overall AT&T statistic from p. 3:

    AT&T research and development delivered 20 million lines of
    new and changed code in 1987 on a base of 35 million lines
    of code.

I don't know the exact counting rules used, and I'd bet they were
different in different parts of the company, but the orders of
magnitude ought to be pretty accurate ...


From: [e-mail]

The AT&T 5ESS(Rg) Switch contains approximately five million lines of
code.

The development organization has contained roughly 1000 people for the
past 12 years (at least). There are over 4000 offices worldwide,
providing service to more than 50 million subscribers.

The above numbers are already out of date -- AT&T is shipping 5ESS
Switches at the rate of about one per day (that is extremely high
volume for a central office switch).


[A Mitel respondent who did not want to be identified concurred with Guy
Turgeon's response below]


From: [e-mail] (Guy Turgeon)

One of the private switches (PBX's) we manufacture here at Mitel is
believed to have way over one million lines of code.  This code was
developped through the ten years of the product's life (in Pascal), and
still going ...


[Ericsson was well represented in the responses, both in numbers and
imagery]


From: [e-mail] (Block Improvement System)

On AXE which is Ericssons there is at least 50 MBytes of source code.

Of course one person didn't write it, it took many people over the
world many years and alot of money.


From: [e-mail] (Alan Malkiel)

I haven't counted our code but the printed copies (which are reduced
so three pages of code are on one page, and double sided to boot.  We
all need bi-focals before turning 40) take up about 40 linear feet of
shelf space.  That's code only, no data, etc.


From: [e-mail] (Jon Gauthier)

Ericsson's AXE swithing system source library probably contains about
12-14 million lines of code by now.  Back in '89, our marketing reps
used to advertise the fact that the source contained about eight
million lines.

Now realize that no switch contains ALL available software libraries,
but I would estimate that a large combination switch (ie, class 5 end
office, access tandem, host for remote switches, and SS-7 capabilities)
would actually contain several million lines of code.


[A different perspective]

From: [e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)

This number is for a cellular switch, not a landline.  The cellular
switch has most of the basic features (call forwarding, etc.) but none
of the CLASS features (Caller ID, etc.) you might find on a land
switch.  The land switch has to deal with all sorts of subscriber
lines that we don't have, but we have to deal with all sorts of RF
channels, paging, and handoffs the land switches don't have to worry
about.  It probably evens out.

Anyway, Motorola's EMX 500 family has roughly one million lines of
code.  How do I know?  Simple.  I counted.  :-) Actually, there were
999,996 lines a year ago when I ran the count, but more code has been
added since then that has easily pushed it over the one million mark.

Roughly half the count is assembly language, and the other half is a
proprietary high-level language.  The processors are Z80s with some
pretty severe hardware hacks to extend their addressing range and to
give them a custom MMU.  The core processing system is six Z80 boards,
networked three active and three standby.  Each board is multitasking
under a proprietary real-time operating system.  I'm the operating
systems guy.

Why Z80s?  Hey, they were cutting edge when the system was originally
designed!

This count is only for core processing software.  Many of our
peripheral boards are "smart" (the newer ones are all 680x0
processors) and have their own local memory and programs.  I didn't
count them.  I also didn't count our base site software.  Add all that
in and you'll easily double or triple the one million number.

Yes, we've got 68020s as peripherals to the Z80s.  Isn't the advance
of technology wonderful?  Why don't we redesign the system to run
completely on the new processors?  *YOU* try to re-engineer a million
lines of code!  And prove that it works!  :-)

Hmmm ... probably ought to summarize this a bit.  Chop out the
architecture part and just print that the core software is about one
million lines, with peripheral and base site software being another one
to two million.  Feel free to print my name and affiliation to validate
the numbers.

                        ----------------

Tom Streeter                                |   [e-mail]
Dept. of Mass Communication                 |   704-251-6227
University of North Carolina at Asheville   |   Opinions expressed here are
Asheville, NC 28804                         |   mine alone.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Maximum Number of Phone Lines to a Residence?
Date: 03 Jul 1993 07:55:05 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> mr!dev2![e-mail]
(Reid R. Buyaky) writes:

> When I originally attemted to set up a multiline BBS system in my
> home, the phone company gave me a long run-around about whether or not
> they could provide me with eight additional phone lines.

> I received a call from the telco's engineer, who said they'd have to
> CHARGE me for the labor involved with burying the new trunk line
> (around $5000?) in order to give me eight phone lines.  I passed, and
> rented an office where multiple lines were readily available.

> I have been told by a phone company employee in NJ (and sysop of a
> multiline BBS there) that the phone company is required by law to
> provide the service requested by their customers, without additional
> charge.

> The phone company told me, though, that the law allows additional
> charges for "unusual requests."  They considered eight phone lines to
> a residence "unusual."

What the tariffs say, and what the telco will do (sometimes quite
different, these two :-(), can vary greatly, depending on your state
and telco.  In the two states where I've had residential service in my
name, California and Washington, there has been no limit to the number
of lines you can have in your residence, at residential rates.
Whether you pay residential or business is based entirely on the use
you make of the lines, and not how many you have.  You may have to
explain in detail exactly why you need many lines at residential
rates, but unless they can cite a specific maximum number of lines
that's spelled out in the tariffs, don't let them charge you business
rates for lines that you will use for residential purposes.

As far as installation goes, I've had some experience with this
recently.  Last month, I had five additional residential lines
installed in my apartment.  Since the in-wall wiring was only two
pair, I had to have an extra cable installed on the outside of my
building from the punchdown block to my unit.  The landlord was
surprisingly willing to give me permission to do this, as long as I
had US West do the job so it was done professionally.

My building is less than a year old, in an area that was only recently
developed, so I knew US West would have plenty of wire in the ground.
I estimated that they would plan for at least two lines per unit, and
since most units only have one line in service, that left at least a
dozen idle pairs to my building's punchdown block.  (I live four plus
miles from the CO, but my neighborhood is served by a subscriber loop
carrier system fed by fiber, so the actual copper distance is less
than a mile.)

To the point of your original question, here's what it cost me: the
standard residential installation charge of $31 per line, plus $11 per
line for the four lines that are in a hunt group (more on hunting
later).  So, I expected to pay around $200 for the installation, plus
the standard labor rate for US West to run the extra wire along the
side of the building.  However, I was in for quite a pleasant
surprise: The "demarc" for an apartment is the first jack within the
unit, since the tenant has no access to the punchdown block outside.
The standard installation fee includes all of the work up to and
including the demarc point.  So, I really got my money's worth on this
one: The installer ran about 75 feet of wire, drilled a hole through
the wall, installed the jacks, and provided all of the materials for
no extra charge.  He must have been here for two and a half hours on a
Saturday morning getting everything in.

The way I understand the tariffs, if they had been out of facilities
between the CO and my complex, that they would have been able to deny
the installation at standard rates.  But, that's one of the reasons I
chose an newer area, as well as a US West area, instead of the nearby
GTE.

I know what it can be like to get the run-around.  In my previous
residence, I had only three conductor (not three pair) wire, and so
could only have one line.  US West showed up to put in the second one,
since I had just assumed that it was at least two pair.  They said
that there was nothing that could be done about it, and the installer
actually suggested that I buy a cordless phone and put the base unit
in the laundry room next to the punchdown block, and keep the handset
in my apartment!  What really makes me mad about this is that since
they had sufficient facilities into the building, that they were on
the hook (so to speak) to install the extra cable from the punchdown
block to my unit.  I was on the fourth floor, and since I'm sure that
the installer was not looking forward to getting out his ladder and
spending half the day tacking wire, I'm sure it was quite convenient
for him to forget to tell me that it was their responsibility, and not
mine.  If I had known then what I know now, I would have insisted that
they fulfil their end of the bargain and put in the wire all the way
to my unit.  Oh well, live and learn.

You did not mention who your telco is.  If it's GTE, they are well
known to rarely have enough facilities to do anything out of the
ordinary that you need done, seemingly regardless of the age of their
facilities or how much advance planning time they have.  There was a
thread in the Digest a couple of years ago about their bungling of the
Home Shopping Network's telecom services -- perhaps a summary is in
the archives.  You would stand a much better chance if you are served
by an RBOC, and of course the age of your immediate neighborhood and
proximity to the CO are factors as well.

As far as the service I got for my installation, I was really
impressed.  I placed my order on a Thursday afternoon, and all five
additional lines were installed and working by noon on the following
Saturday, less than 48 hours after placing my order!  And this
included all of the wiring work that had to be custom done.  The
installer even told me that they almost ran a 16 pair drop into my
unit, terminated with a 66 block, but that they just couldn't justify
that for a residential customer.

The only problem I had was with the hunting, which was not working at
all.  I didn't notice this for about a week, so I had to call Repair
Service to get it corrected.  A few hours later, the lines were indeed
hunting, but one of them hunted into someone else's residence!  A
second call got that problem corrected.

So, my advice would be to get more of the details of exactly why it is
they can't complete the order.  Any area built within the last 20
years or so should have provisions for at least two lines per house,
if not more, so unless all your neighbors have extra lines, there
should be facilities available.  At least with US West, they seem to
be planning for the future, namely for services that would require
more pairs (at more expense of course :-)) -- their pamphlet which
tells customers what kind of wire they should put in the walls for new
construction says that the *minimum* for new residential wiring is
four pair wire.  They even specifically mention that each pair should
be individually twisted.  So if they are telling people that that's
what should be installed inside the residence, presumably they are
planning on their end to have the facilities to deliver services for
those pairs.  Good luck!


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Scott A Harris)
Subject: Re: Maximum Number of Phone Lines to a Residence?
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 12:24:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> mr!dev2![e-mail]
(Reid R. Buyaky) writes:

Good story deleted ...

I had a similar problem with my local telco. I want to run in five
lines into my home for a dial up Unix machine with access to the
Internet.  My fax line that I have now only costs me $17.99 a month,
so naturally I just wanted five more $17.99 lines installed.  The
phone company didn't give me the trunk line run around they just flat
out said "NO."  That is just too many lines for a residence.  They
suggested I go with a Centrex service.  I like the concept, but at
$36.99 per line *each month* and additional "service" fees, this can
add up quickly.  Are there any better ways to go about getting a hunt
group for dirt cheap?


Thanks,

Scott Harris   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Sigh -- is This an Area-Code Change Problem?
Date: 3 Jul 1993 00:45:23 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (J. Eric
Townsend) writes:

> I get about a call a week for Gravis, the people who make meecees and
> a ton of other PC crap. At least one of their numbers is 604.431.1xxx.
> The caller is usually in San Francisco proper (part of the 415 area
> code).  My work number is 415.604.4311.

> I suspect what is happening is that there's an older switch somewhere
> that sees the '1604', decides 'hey, that person doesn't need to dial a
> one to get to the 604 exchange, I'll just route it thru', and ignores
> the trailing three digits of the Gravis #.

I would guess that it's much more likely that the caller is forgetting
to dial the 1 before the area code, so the switch sees the first seven
digits and complete the call locally, and doesn't even hear the last
three digits.  Remember that in most of 408, you don't have to dial a
preceeding 1 for any call, so people in the Bay Area may be used to
not dialing the one.  I think this is changing sometime this year as
Pacific Bell implements a uniform dialing plan for the whole state.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 17:54 CDT
From: [e-mail] (David W. Tamkin)
Subject: Re: Sigh -- is This an Area-Code Change Problem?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DWT)
Organization: Contributor Account at MCS, Chicago, Illinois  60657


J. Eric Townsend asked in <[e-mail]> in
comp.dcom.telecom:

> I get about a call a week for Gravis ...  At least one of their numbers is
> 604.431.1xxx.  The caller is usually in ... the 415 area code.  My work
> number is 415.604.4311.

> I suspect that ... an older switch somewhere ...
> sees the '1604', decides 'hey, that person doesn't need to dial a
> one to get to the 604 exchange, I'll just route it thru' ...

I suspect that people are not dialing the 1.

> Am I in the right ballpark as to what is happening?  A better question
> is: what do I do about it?

If the caller did dial 1 604 431 1xxx, recommend that he or she try
10XXX 1 604 431 1xxx instead.


David W. Tamkin   Box 59297   Northtown Station, Illinois  60659-0297
[e-mail]   CompuServe: 73720,1570   MCI Mail: 426-1818


[Moderator's Note: David, I don't think 10xxx will get you anything
that 1+ won't get you if the local telco is messing up on it.  I would
suggest to Mr. Townsend that *he* try dialing the 1-604 number from
the office where the troubles always seem to originate (if he can figure
that out) and see if *he* in turn reaches his office. If he does not,
then he knows the callers are klutzes and can so inform them. If he
does reach his own number then there is a problem.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 10:37:09 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sigh -- is This an Area-Code Change Problem?


I take it you are trying to find out where the people who reach you
(when the Gravis firm in British Columbia is intended) are calling
from.  Assuming such callers are in the 415 area (the area you
remained in when 510 was formed east of S.F.Bay), it's been four years
and at least a few months since their equipment was to be programmed
for N0X/N1X prefixes (604-4311 to reach you, 1-604-431-1xxx to reach
Gravis).  (My gosh, what'll happen when people need to call an NNX
area code in 1995 and after?)

But, strictly speaking, this is not an area-code change problem, even
if the within-415 assumption is correct.  N0X/N1X prefixes became
necessary as an alternative to an immediate area-code split (415 was
running out of NNX).

People should be nice enough to help you when you explain that you are
trying to find out what is happening.  More than ten years ago, I had
a case where another man (let's call him John Smith here) got a new
number which was the same as mine except for the last two digits being
transposed.  I got some of his calls, and I was able to learn that
they were intended for John Smith at that particular number, then I
called the phone company, which corrected the number which the
intercept operator had for John Smith.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #440
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16635;
          3 Jul 93 3:47 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01126
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 01:31:52 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20398
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 01:31:01 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 01:31:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #441

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 01:31:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 441

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Future of ISDN (Ketil Albertsen)
    Re: Future of ISDN (William H. Sohl)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Bob Larribeau)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (Don Hackler)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (Paul R. Coen)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (David H. Close)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (Tom Moser)
    Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT! (Justin Greene)
    Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT! (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT! (Charles Stephens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ketil Albertsen,TIH)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Organization: T I H / T I S I P
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 15:04:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Garrett Wollman) writes:

> From the point of view of Joe Phone Customer, there are several
> things wrong with ISDN:

> - When the power goes out, you can't use it.

Not so in here Norway, for Joe Phone. Surely the telco won't deliver
the power to run your fax machine, but it *will* for running a plain
phone set -- just as with POTS. The ISDN standards define how this
power is to be supplied.

> - You need a separate line for each extension in the house.

I don't get this. The Joe Phone interface will be a bus cable that
allows up to eight phones to be connected. They may have different
sub-addresses, too. The plain 2B+D allows only two simultaneous phone
conversations, but my POTS allows only one!

> - Nobody needs digital voice.

Isn't this where the IS, 'Integrated Services' comes in? We want ISDN
for a whole lot of non-speech applications (and extensions to the
voice service, too!). Besides, you probably have digital voice already
 -- a large fraction (almost all in this country) of the interoffice
trunks have been digital for years. If they weren't, the noise level
would have been much higher. With respect to this argument, the only
difference between ISDN and POTS is who has the AD/DA converters: You
or your local office. It really is a pity to be limited to 9600 bps
through a modem for a few hundred feet (between you and the local
office), when the entire rest of the network handles 64 kbps!

> - You have to live within 18000 feet of the CO or mux.

This is no major problem. Those muxes are small and cheap and
physically designed for eg. hanging in a lightpole.

> - Terminal equipment is extremely expensive.

It is? Sure for now they are more expensive than POTS equipment, but
not that much more expensive. Even before the official introduction of
ISDN here, you can get an ISDN phone at two to three times the
cheapest POTS phone -- and if you want a POTS phone with any non-basic
functionality, you are soon within the price range of ISDN models. Of
course a factor of two to three for the entry-level is significant,
but while POTS phone prices are very tightly squeezed, there is a lot
of potential for reducing the price of ISDN ones. The price war has
hardly begun -- it is seller's market yet.

Another aspect: If you let your PC truly make use of ISDN, eg. to save
you the cost of a machine, a phone answering machine, a high-speed
modem etc, etc, then it certainly isn't difficult justifying the cost of
the ISDN card.

> From my point of view, broadband ISDN may well turn out to be
> something interesting.  However, narrowband 2B+D ISDN is completely
> useless in 99% of all residential settings.

Although I agree about B-ISDN being interesting, I would rather say
that narrowband ISDN fills the residential requirements better than it
does business requirements. Two point-to-point medium capacity
switched lines just isn't enough for business use - even a PRI with 23
or 30 lines are not exactly what we want. But for residential use,
2*64 kbps is more than sufficient, both in number and capacity. It
will take quite a few years before every household can afford a 155
Mbps connection, and I don't think they'll be satisified with a 9600
bps modem until that time!


Ketil Albertsen

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 13:54:38 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Garrett Wollman) writes:

> And, of course, if you are a user of major worldwide data networks
> such as the Internet, ISDN stands for "It Still Does Nothing".

If you are an Internet user that uses an analog modem access, then
ISDN will add a significant throughput improvement to your interaction
with your internet gateway site.

> From the point of view of Joe Phone Customer, there are several
> things wrong with ISDN:

> - When the power goes out, you can't use it.

And so does your PC, your refrigerator, your analog modem, your
cordless phone, etc.  The immediate need for communications in a power
failure is usually only for emergency voice communication (e.g. to
police, fire, etc.), CPE suppliers of ISDN are looking into ways to
"shed" functionality in a power failure and only provide voice
communications using an internal battery.

> - You need a separate line for each extension in the house.

That is a function of the availability of customer premise terminal
adapters.  There is no technical reason why a TA can't be designed and
sold which provides extensions within the home.  It is not necessary
to add separte ISDN lines for each extension.

> - Nobody needs digital voice.

The telephone network is almost 100% digital now.  ISDN voice services
just bridge the last mile to the users telephone with digital.  As to
the need for digital voice, that's certainly a matter of opinion.
Certainly the music industry has gone full digital (CDs, etc.).

> - You have to live within 18000 feet of the CO or mux.

That's generally true, but not an absolute.  There are "range
extenders" (i.e. digital isdn repeaters) which can be used to increase
loop range for basic ISDN.  One factor to consider also is that
something along the lines of 90% or more of all telephone customers
are within 18,000 feet of their serving CO.

> - Terminal equipment is extremely expensive.

So were PCs, VCRs, etc. when they first became available.  Mass market
deployment and production has always resulted in significant cost
reductions for electronic equipment over time.

> From my point of view, broadband ISDN may well turn out to be
> something interesting.  However, narrowband 2B+D ISDN is completely
> useless in 99% of all residential settings.

I think as greater amounts of CPE and applications become available,
your assessment will change.  Certainly anyone using a modem at 9.6 or
lower would see a five fold or better increase in throughput just
using a 64Kb B channel for data access to whatever system they are
using.

Bellcore ISDN Information Hotline - 1-800-992-ISDN


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Bob Larribeau <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 93 17:00:07 -0700


> And, of course, if you are a user of major worldwide data networks
> such as the Internet, ISDN stands for "It Still Does Nothing".

Try using ISDN to access the Internet.  Some of the ISDN bridge
companies are starting to provide compression.  Effective data rates
of t 256-512 Kbps on an ISDN BRI appear to be quite achievable.  I
don't know about you, but that gets me excited!

> - When the power goes out, you can't use it.

True.

> - You need a separate line for each extension in the house.

You can use passive bus and support up to eight devices on one ISDN
line.  I understand well about B-channel blocking.  This is not the
same thing as extensions, but it provides a level of line sharing.

> - Nobody needs digital voice.

While there is some audio quality improvement, it is not a major thing
except, maybe for speaker phones.  The real advantage of digital voice
is the increased sophistication of the signalling protocols.  I would
love to have an ISDN voice set because it would give me the ability to
terminate multiple call appearances on a single ISDN line.  It would
also give me easy access to a number of features like transfer and
conference that I don't have today.  My home-based business is very
telephone intensive.  I would find ISDN voice a major improvement.

> - You have to live within 18000 feet of the CO or mux.

Extenders are available that will take you out to 40,000 feet.  The
new single line tariff in California includes extenders at no
additional cost.

> - Terminal equipment is extremely expensive.

ISDN equipment is very cost effective for many applications.  Costs
will come down as volumes go up and competition increases.  We are
still very early on the curve.

> From my point of view, broadband ISDN may well turn out to be
> something interesting.  However, narrowband 2B+D ISDN is completely
> useless in 99% of all residential settings.

I don't understand why why you find narrowband ISDN to be completely
useless when you find broadband ISDN to be interesting.  Pac Bell has
said that they will have universal deployment of ISDN in California in
1997.  They also say that universal deployment of broadband ISDN as a
ubiquitous switched service won't happen until 2015.  Personnaly I
can't wait for BISDN.  Besides I expect by 2015 we will all be looking
forward to the implementation of photonic switching with a terabit to
the home - poor old broadband ISDN will look pale by comparison.  Now
that is what I am really waiting for :-)


Bob Larribeau     San Francisco

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Don Hackler)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Organization: a2i network
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 01:44:24 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter Alan
Dutton) writes:

> Now if the phone company knows that it's a number that they
> want me to dial a "1" first for, then why can't they just connect me
> in the first place?

> Similarly, if I don't realize that a phone number I am calling is in
> Worcester, and I dial a "1" first because I think I'm being clever by
> trying to avoid the recorded message, they tell me that I have to call
> the number again, and this time without the "1". Again, I ask, if they
> know I don't have to dial the "1", then why don't they know enough to
> connect me?

> This has bugged me for a while ...

There was similar situation in the 408 area code up until about a year
ago.  I drove me buggy, too.  I live at the intersection of the 408,
415, and 510 area codes.  Dialing from 415 and 510 (where most of my
clients are) required 1 to call 408 numbers, but 408 (where I live)
wouldn't allow you to use 1+ to call 415 and 510.

408 will now allows (but doesn't require) a 1+ to dial the 415 and 510
areas.

I also have fun explaining to friends that a 1+ call across area codes
is not a toll call if it's close enough.  With the outragous intra-lata
rates here, it's a serious concern to them.  (I run a BBS, and have a
lot of folks trying to figure out whether the number is 'free' or not
for them to call ...)


[e-mail]  (shakala BBS [phone])    [e-mail]
Don Hackler

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 23:13:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul R. Coen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Organization: Drew University Academic Computing


In reference to having to place a "1" in front of the seven-digit
number for an in-area-code toll call, I grew up in Rhode Island, and I
thought everyplace worked that way, until I went to school in New
Jersey.  (Rhode Island had some bizarre calling areas, though.  Some
parts pretty far south, such as Warwick and East Greenwich could call
some exchanges in southern Mass. without an area code or the 1+ -- it
was local.)

There was a pretty common situation where freshman who had lived in
New England Telephone (NYNEX) served areas assumed that if you didn't
have to put a "1" in front of it, it was a non-toll call -- and made
lots of them.

Since New Jersey Bell doesn't work that way, they were in for a
surprise with their first phone bill.  Since this often had the
install charge (45 bucks for 30 seconds of data entry, of course),
plus the deposit from hell (90 bucks), the first phone bill could be a
shocker.

I always regarded the 1+ as a convenience -- I knew if something was
inside the local calling area without having to look it up.  Not that
looking it up is always possible when you're at a phone other than
your own.  I suppose the 1+xxx-xxxx would also allow someone to more
easily block non-local calls on a PBX.  Just block all 1+ or 0+ or
force them to go through a switchboard, let other things go through.
No need for a database for your PBX or anything :) That's just a
guess, though -- I don't know of anyplace that filtered things that
way.

I've heard that N.E. Telephone was going to be phasing the 1+ out,
however.  Can anyone else confirm this?

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Date: 3 Jul 1993 05:31:43 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


[e-mail] (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:

> Again, I ask, if they know I don't have to dial the "1", then why
> don't they know enough to connect me?

Because, like the recording says, they're "sorry".  Yes, they are!


Dave Close, BS'66 Ec  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 07:22:20 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13 : Issue 435 [e-mail] (Peter
Alan Dutton) writes:

> When I make calls from Long Island (where I'm from) I never have to
> dial a "1" first no matter where I am calling in North America. I
> still have a hard time remembering to dial "1" first for calls outside
> the area code here in Massachusetts. I can understand why one would
> need to dial a "1" first for extra-area-code calls (in case some
> exchanges within the area code are numbers that used to be reserved
> only for area codes, for example). Apparently, they still use only
> normal exchanges for (516), and so the telephone company automatically
> knows if one has dialed an area code or not.

Area Code 516 is only about 2/3 used at this point in terms of
exchanges and I don't see NYTel running out of them prior to the
calling plan change-over in the next year or two.

If one remembers that there can be 9,999 numbers per exchange, then
Area Code 516 has a long way to go before running out of numbers that
can be assigned.

So, at the present time, there is no need for 1+ for any dialing
although I wish NYTel would start making the changeover announcements
to teach the peoplel what's going to happen in the future.

BTW: The new phone books are due for distribution and I'll be updating
my list of exchanges in Area Code 516 and will pass them out to anyone
who wants a copy.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, LI, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Senior Technical Specialist: Scientific Computer Facility

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tom Moser)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Date: 2 Jul 1993 16:14:45 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Peter Alan Dutton) writes:

> When I make calls from Long Island (where I'm from) I never have to
> dial a "1" first no matter where I am calling in North America. I
> still have a hard time remembering to dial "1" first for calls outside
> the area code here in Massachusetts.  [stuff deleted]

I have exactly the opposite complaint. When I go to Chicago I can make
a call which is outside the local area (but in the same area code)
without dialing 1 first. I HATE THIS. The dialing '1' first tells me
that I am going to pay extra money to make this call. If I do not dial
'1' first it means, to me, that the call is covered as part of my
normal monthly service.

To 1+ or 0+ means that I am spending extra money. I like to know this.


Tom

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Justin Greene)
Subject: Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT!
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 02:45:28 GMT


> I don't know of other cities have similar phones, but in addition to
> the usual New York Telephone pay phones scattered around the city,
> there are a small number of phones belonging to companies no one's
> ever heard of.  The last time I used one of those phones, I put in a
> quarter and dialed away, but I was informed that I hadn't inserted a
> quarter.  I called the operator and requested a refund.  She said she
> would mail me 25 cents.  I never got it.

I will walk many blocks before using a COCOT (Customer owned, coin
operated telephone).  Many shut off the keypad and make my voicemail
useless, most of the ones here in Denver do not hav a complete list of
local exchanges programmed in and want me to pay $1.70 for a local
call to my voicemail and I have even found some that charge for 800
numbers making my calling card useless (is this legal, I though I read
about some legislation somewhere regarding this?).  Some phones I
found make tones but they are not true and my VM will not respond to
them. I know, I should always have my handy dandy tone dialer with
me ...  :-)


Justin

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT!
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 06:00:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:

> the usual New York Telephone pay phones scattered around the city,
> there are a small number of phones belonging to companies no one's
> ever heard of.  The last time I used one of those phones, I put in a
> quarter and dialed away, but I was informed that I hadn't inserted a
> quarter.  I called the operator and requested a refund.  She said she
> would mail me 25 cents.  I never got it.

    We hear a lot of terrible things about COCOTs.  I also
generally avoid them, since they generally don't do what I want to do.
Some haven't let me use 950 to access my long distance carrier.
Others disable the DTMF pad when the call goes through so I can't pick
up messages off my answering machine.  But, there MUST be some good
COCOTs out there!  Is it not possible to have a privately owned pay
phone that works well?  It does make sense to me that these phones be
privately owned, giving some competition in the placement of the
phones (I guess prices are controlled by the PUC and the FCC).  I'm
sure we now have more public phones out there than when just the
"phone company" was placing them.  So, any c.d.t. readers in the COCOT
biz?  I' ve read very little about it.  Some of the technology would
be interesting to hear about, as well as the business itself.


Harold


[Moderator's Note: A couple years ago when we had this dicussion and
terms like 'botom-feeders' were in all the messages, we did have one
regular reader who operated a service bureau for COCOT and AOS type
calls.  I wonder if he is still out there. He wrote to us several
times to explain his position and business practices.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Charles Stephens (ast GA uucpMC - exp 1/9/93))
Subject: Re: Coin Refund Required ... NOT!
Date: 3 Jul 1993 06:36:56 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Dept of Math and CS


David J. Greenberger ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> I don't know of other cities have similar phones, but in addition to
> the usual New York Telephone pay phones scattered around the city,
> there are a small number of phones belonging to companies no one's
> ever heard of.  The last time I used one of those phones, I put in a
> quarter and dialed away, but I was informed that I hadn't inserted a
> quarter.  I called the operator and requested a refund.  She said she
> would mail me 25 cents.  I never got it.

Well many cities have pay phones not owned by the local telco.  In my
town Smyrna, there is one of these little mom and pop operator
companies called Southern Payphone.  They have one of these payphones
outside my apartment building and before I had phone service, I
needed to make some very important calls to the DMV.

As many know the Department of Motor Vehicles is a very busy place,
even with their phones, so after kerplunking my quarter in and
dialing, I get a busy.  No problem.  Hangup and get my quarter and try
again? Right?  Wrong!  No quarter.

Well it has a neato number to call for refunds (211) and I do so.  The
lady who answers says that she can mail a check or try again.  Well
she says to hang up and she'll call back.  She does.  She then says
that she couldn't connect me because there was an answering device at
the other end.  I tell her that it was an automated operator (you know
press 1 for this, 2 for that, 0 for a human, etc.).  She started to
get REAL snotty and said that if I told her in the first place, then
she wouldn't have made the call (she said nothing about not being able
to call automated operators or answering machines).  Well then I asked
for the check (I wasn't going to let them keep MY $0.25, they didn't
make the call), and she said that I was given the option and she
wouldn't.  She then impolitely hangs up on me.

I call again.  She answers again.  I ask for a supervisor.  She says I am
the supervisor (likely), so I ask for anyone higher up.  She then spits
off that she was part owner.  I ask to file a complaint, she hangs up.

Witch.  I should have stuck gum down the coin slot, that would have
taught them.

> Since then, I never use non-New York Telephone pay phones (in New
> York, of course).  If I have to make a phone call and all I find is a
> non-NYT phone, I'll keep on looking.  It's not that 25 cents is that
> much (it's even less than the postage they'd have to pay to get it to
> me); I just see no reason to use phones that both are of poor quality
> and have poor customer support if they charge the same as New York
> Telephone.

I always look for a Southern Bell phone, they are nice, courteous and
will always refund my money.  I am calling for a boycot of any
Southern Payphone phone.  I know this would only affect a few in the
south, but I think they should start being more responsive to customer
complaints.  Uugh, did that lady make me mad.


Charles Stephens    [e-mail]
DISCLAIMER: I am a guest a Emory's Math and CS Dept., all opinions expressed,
except those quoted by others, are my own, and not those of said organization.

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #441
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18376;
          3 Jul 93 4:44 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05494
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 02:34:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25465
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 02:34:17 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 02:34:17 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #442

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 02:34:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 442

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telecom Experience at a Military Base (Roy M. Silvernail)
    Re: Telecom Experience at a Military Base (Will Martin)
    Re: Telecom Experience at a Military Base (Mark Wilkins)
    Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year (Jim Rees)
    Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year (Jim Haynes)
    Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year (Tom Olin)
    Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year (Brad Hicks)
    Re: NOKIA Problem (Les Reeves)
    Re: NOKIA Problem (Kenneth R. Crudup)
    Re: Dialing Instruction Changes in 802 Land (Carl Moore)
    Re: Dialing Instruction Changes in 802 Land (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: Dialing Instruction Changes in 802 Land (John R. Levine)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (Brett Frankenberger)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (Doug Granzow)
    Re: New York Telephone Outage: Cut Cable in Mouth Vernon (Chris Zguris)
    Re: New York Telephone Outage: Cut Cable in Mount Vernon (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Alan Boritz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Telecom Experience at a Military Base
From: [e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 18:14:05 CST
Organization: The Villa's most exclusive annex


In comp.dcom.telecom, our Esteemed Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Here's the scoop. The modular jack had two pairs on
> it like most. One pair is used to operate the phone in the usual way.
> The other pair functioned sort of like A/A1 leads to illuminate a lamp
> on a key set elsewhere when the phone goes off hook; but in this case
> the second pair probably completed a loop inside the phone which, when
> when it went open (as it would do when the phone is unplugged) triggered
> a relay somewhere downstairs which in turn caused an alarm to sound and/
> or something to light up;

PAT, you have just solved a mystery that had me quite puzzled.

I have an older ITT 2500-type desk phone (in your basic nondescript
brown color).  I picked it up years ago in Alaska, and it's always
worked well.  When I moved into my present apartment, I had a real
struggle with the second line going off hook unexplainedly while I was
setting things up.  I traced the problem finally to the 2500.  Inside,
the black and yellow pair were connected to a common terminal.  At the
time, I thought it was a pretty dumb thing to do.

Now I look back and recall where I found that phone ... at an auction.
It was part of a lot from a bankrupt small hotel.


Roy M. Silvernail |+|  [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 93 12:49:46 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom Experience at a Military Base


Considering the number of military and DoD civilian people who travel
these days with a laptop, I find it rather astounding that transient
housing at any military installation would NOT be expecting its
patrons to be making data calls.

Even before the days of laptops, we lugged TI 745 thermal-printing
terminals all over the country all the time ... (Of course, those had
acoustic couplers built in, so we didn't need access direct to the
line ...)


Regards,

Will

------------------------------

From: Mark Wilkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom Experience at a Military Base
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 14:50:11 GMT


  Regarding telecom limitations on military bases:

  Here at Vandenberg Air Force Base, not only are voice calls
systematically monitored, but a program is being set in place soon to
monitor information transmitted by "USAF unsecure radios, facsimile
machines, data modems, computer systems and networks, and cellular
telephone communications."  It's all part of working at a military
installation.

  Unfortunately, some security employee may think to question whether
reading TELECOM digest is an official activity.  I've got my fingers
crossed.


Mark Wilkins     SRI International, MS710    Vandenberg AFB, CA 93436

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year
Date: 2 Jul 1993 13:24:02 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI


In article <[e-mail]>, TELECOM Moderator <telecom@
eecs.nwu.edu> writes:

> In a one year period from 1991 through 1992, losses from cellular
> phone fraud tripled from $100 million to $300 million nationwide
> according to the Washington DC based Cellular Telecommunications
> Industry Association.

I have two comments.

Whoever designed the AMPS "security" system was an idiot.  It was well
known in the telephone industry at least as far back as 1978 (see the
Bell System Technical Journal describing the Unix password system)
that you don't broadcast passwords in the clear.  That should be
obvious to anyone, even if you aren't expert in security systems.

The other thing is, I don't understand how roamer fraud could be a
problem in LA, since the LA carriers don't allow inward roaming
without a pre-arranged billing arrangement (usually via credit card).
Can someone explain this?


[Moderator's Note: Well, they don't *any longer*.  Fraud problems,
maybe? They were not always that way, where they?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 11:51:44 -0700
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year


Not to get into the old rut of arguing whether it's the cell phone
companies' own fault that their systems are poorly designed, and all
the analogies about whether you left your door unlocked, ad
infinitum ... but it does seem that the cell system doesn't make the
best use of available technology to prevent that kind of thing.

Here in the computer biz we have Kerberos authentication, where
passwords do not go over the net in the clear, and where authen-
tication depends on a secret shared between the key distribution
center and the person who uses the service.  (A side benefit of that
is that you may wish to allow the person to use any workstation <->
any cellphone, since responsibility for paying for the calls rests on
the person, not on the phone itself.)

Maybe I'm armchair quarterbacking, but it seems to me Kerberos should
be good for making cell phone accounting really secure.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 09:40:17 EDT
From: adiron![e-mail] (Tom Olin)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator) wrote:

> So phreaks, have phun!  Judge Tashima in Los Angeles Federal District
> Court is on your side.

Do you say this because you sincerely feel that the judge intention-
ally made a decision contrary to the law, or are you merely displeased
with the practical consequences of the decision?

It is convenient to have judges decide cases based on sentiment, but
that does not make it right.  There have been many decisions the
effects of which I dislike but which had to be made based on the
current law.  And there is also the real possibility that a law may be
interpreted differently by different people.

I really doubt that Judge Tashima is in favor of phone fraud.


Tom Olin ([e-mail])

------------------------------

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 02 Jul 93 22:38:15 GMT
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year


> "Why bother," said Mr. Belitz. "The judge in this district
> said cellular fraud is not a violation of the law ..."

Well, when the system is broken, people hack the system.  When the Law
is broken, hack the Law: establish a widely-published rate for "using
an ESN that was not issued to you by an FCC-approved cellular service
provider" (say, $1M per minute?) and then when you catch somebody, sue
to collect.  The ESN cloning itself wouldn't be possible to prevent
under this system (unless you could catch them testing it when they
turn it on), but once word gets out on the street, demand will dry up.

Of course, this presupposes that you HAVE some way to detect
fraudulent use of an ESN in time to catch the user, anyway.  Which
they don't.

An alternate way to hack the social system: if the law won't protect
your business from fraud, sell the assets, cash out, and shut it down.
See how well Judge Tashima and his fellow jurists like living in a Los
Angeles without cellular phone service!  I suspect that the cellular
phone providers can live without a month's worth of income easier than
every lawyer, Assemblyman, and judge in the LA basin can live without
their phones.

But honestly folks, this is yet another attempt to retrofit a legal
solution onto a technical problem.  The real problem here is that
valid ESNs can be taken right off the airwaves and then used for
months, because the ESN is broadcast "in the clear" and there's no way
to tell a valid use from an invalid use.  The cellular phone
manufacturers put in no security other than "security through
obscurity" -- which NEVER works.


J. Brad Hicks     Internet: mc![e-mail]
X.400: c=US admd=ATTMail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 23:09:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NOKIA Problem


I had the same problem with a Tandy CT-101 cellular phone.  All Tandy
phones are made by Nokia.  I considered adding a small sealed
lead-acid battery to power the phone to cure this annoying problem.  A
sealed lead-acid would properly charge from the car charging system,
since it is chemically the same as the car battery.

However, some means would have to be provided to disconnect the
phone+sealed battery combination during cranking.

It might also be possible to use a large (> 100,000 micro-Farad)
capacitor at the phone supply.  These are becoming popular with
200/watt per-channel in my trunk crowd.

This seemed like two much work!  My problem was solved when I replaced
the CT-101 with a CT-102.  It seemed totally immune to sagging voltages.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Jul 93 22:21:13 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NOKIA Problem
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ted
Dodd) writes:

> The Burban is a diesel.  What occurs is that I must allow the diesel
> glowplugs some time before I can crank the engine.  During this
> period ... the cellular unit comes on. When I crank the engine, the
> cellular goes off and I have to strike the power switch to get it back
> on.  If the engine is warm and no glow time is required, the cellular
> comes on when I crank.  It appears to be the off time when I crank
> that causes the unit distraction.

> My installer says it is battery drop but the battery drop is the same if
> glow time is used or not.

Huh?

Glow plugs are high-current devices. Several seconds of glow plugs
plus the current necessary for cranking (a high-compression diesel)
will drop the voltage down past the "low-battery shutoff" threshold of
your mobile. Just cranking apparantly leaves the voltage high enough.
Probably time for a new battery, as well.


Kenneth R. Crudup, ATT BL, 1600 Osgood St, N. Andover, MA 01845-1043
MV20-3T5B, [phone].    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 12:37:35 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Dialing Instruction Changes in 802 Land


> Direct-dialed calls within 802 will remain 1+7D or 7D depending on
> toll status and/or the whim of the PSB.

This is referring to this coming Sept. 15.

The history.of.area.splits file, which I update from time to time, has
a note saying that the leading 1 for (toll) direct-dialed calls within
802 will be going away sometime in 1993-94.  No need for N0X/N1X
prefixes is cited, but because NNX area codes are coming later, either
you get these dialing changes or you will require timeout resolution
for some calls.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: Dialing Instruction Changes in 802 Land
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 17:37:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> I made a slight error:

> Effective September 15, all calling-card and operator-assisted calls
> [will be 0+802+7D]

This should be November 15, not September 15.  Sorry if anybody got
confused.


Garrett A. Wollman   [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman      UVM disagrees.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 09:54 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Dialing Instruction Changes in 802 Land
Organization: I.E.C.C.


According to the new Northeast Kingdom (the part of Vermont which,
even by Vermont standards, is remote and rural) phone book, there are
more new dialing instructions.

One change is that starting some time in the summer, in-state operator
assisted calls are dialed 0 + 802 + number rather than 0 + number.
The other is that towns with free local calling to towns in another
area code now have to dial 1 + 603, for the towns that can call into
New Hampshire, and 1 + 819 for Derby Line calling Rock Island, Que.
Any call that used to be free remains free.  There are also a few
small towns which had old SxS exchanges wired through New Hampshire
where you used to dial 1 + 802 for a toll call within Vermont but no 1
+ 603 for a toll call in New Hampshire.  This has been cleaned up.

I don't really understand why they're going to eleven digit dialing
for local inter-area calls.  Vermont is nowhere near running out of
prefixes.  I guess they want to be consistent with the rest of NET
territory, particularly 617 and 508 which are both much fuller, even
though recently split.


Regards,   John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brett Frankenberger)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1993 13:15:24 GMT


[e-mail] (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:

> If I didn't explain that well enough: I dial "383-xxxx" and the
> recording tells me "We're sorry, you must first dial a '1' to reach
> that number" and I curse and hang up and dial "1-383-xxx" even though
> it's not a long distance number (since it's in the same area code, and
> rather close by, to boot), and New England Telephone just KNOWS that
> I'm calling Framingham in the first place, else I wouldn't have gotten
> that recording. Why does this happen?

> I do realize that local calling areas are MUCH smaller, populationwise
> and areawise, in New England than in Metro New York (compare the local
> calling areas of Nassau County, New York, and Raymond, Maine), so why
>  the "1"?

> Similarly, if I don't realize that a phone number I am calling is in
> Worcester, and I dial a "1" first because I think I'm being clever by
> trying to avoid the recorded message, they tell me that I have to call
> the number again, and this time without the "1". Again, I ask, if they
> know I don't have to dial the "1", then why don't they know enough to
> connect me?

The area in question apparantly uses "1 means toll."  It's not that
uncommon, that's how it is in St. Louis, MO and Omaha, NE (the two
cities where I've lived enough to become fully acquainted with the
telephone systems).

If you dial XXX-XXXX when you should have dialed 1-XXX-XXXX, the telco
could go ahead and complete the call, but then you would have "1 is
irrelevant, dial it or don't dial it as you see fit -- it doesn't
matter" dialing (which, incidentally, is how the PBX at my employer is
 ... it never makes a difference if you do or don't dial 1).

By enforcing the correct "dial 1" rules, the telco switch is able to
make sure you know if the call is toll or not.  If you just dial
XXX-XXX, that means (to the switch) that you don't think the call is
toll.  If you are wrong, the switch will tell you by informing you
that you must dial 1 (and the reverse applies also).  Since some
people care if the call is toll or not, and can't remembner exactly
where is and is not toll, this helps them.  Of course, if you simply
call where you need to without regard for LD charges, then this kind
of gets in the way ...


(formerly [e-mail])  Brett Frankenberger  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Organization: ProLine [pro-cynosure]
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 15:18:56 EDT


[e-mail] (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:

> But what I don't understand is whenever I call, say, Framingham, a
> mere 20 or so miles from here in Worcester, and in the same area code,
> they tell me that they cannot complete my call unless I dial a "1"
> first.  Now if the phone company knows that it's a number that they
> want me to dial a "1" first for, then why can't they just connect me
> in the first place?

Basically, dialing 1 is like saying "I know this is a long distance
call and I understand that I will have to pay extra for this call."
It's a good idea, I think, and it makes it easy to teach kids how to
use the phone ("Never dial a number that starts with 1, because it
costs more.")

> If I didn't explain that well enough: I dial "383-xxxx" and the
> recording tells me "We're sorry, you must first dial a '1' to reach
> that number" and I curse and hang up and dial "1-383-xxx" even though
> it's not a long distance number (since it's in the same area code, and
> rather close by, to boot), and New England Telephone just KNOWS that
> I'm calling Framingham in the first place, else I wouldn't have gotten
> that recording. Why does this happen?

Are you *sure* it's not a long distance number?  I bet it is.  I guess
you'll find out when you get your phone bill.  Dialing 1 for long
distance should eliminate the surprise.  ("They charged me long
distance rates for that call??")


Doug Granzow ([e-mail]) -- Cynosure BBS 410-549-2584 (free!)


[Moderator's Note: The only thing you can say conclusively about 1+
here in Chicago is that it is another area code. No more, no less. I
dial 1 + 708 + to reach the terminal server I am on right now. I can
stay on all night -- and probably will -- for the five cents a local
untimed call costs me. When I call fifty feet to the McDonald's on
the other side of Howard Street to have them bring me my lunch it is a
1 + 708 number.  They tried to call me back one day and accused me of
giving them the wrong number until they suddenly realized they had
forgotten to dial 1 + 312 first. The kid walked across the street and
up to my door because he could not figure out what was wrong when
calling me on the phone.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 02:59 GMT
From: Christopher Zguris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New York Telephone Outage


In TELECOM DIGEST Volume 13 Issue 437 John Hawkinson ([e-mail])
writes:

> According to New York Telephone, there has been a cut trunk (cable) in
> Mount Vernon, NY, causing a major service disruption. The estimated
> time for completion of repair is 5:00pm Friday! The disruption has the
> following effects:

>*      A large number (all?) of 914 (Westchester, including Yonkers,
>       White Plains, etc.)  numbers are unreachable from 212 (and
>       perhaps other places). You get an ``all circuits busy'' message

>*      A large number (all?) of 212 numbers are unreachable
>       from most of 914. You just get a fast busy.

With this cable break in place, what would happen if someone in 914
tried to call a business in 212 on an 800 number provided by someone
other than NY Telephone (MCI, SPRINT, ETC.)? Likewise, what would
happen in the same situation using one of the local 800 numbers NY
Telephone tries to push on its customers?


Christopher Zguris    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I suppose if the wires handling the call went
through that cable the call would not go through. 800 numbers are
nothing special ... they travel over a wire pair also.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 93 17:49 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New York Telephone Outage: Cut Cable in Mount Vernon


[e-mail] (John Hawkinson) writes:

> According to New York Telephone, there has been a cut trunk (cable) in
> Mount Vernon, NY, causing a major service disruption.

Does anyone have any information on any effects on 9-1-1 service in
the area?


Paul Cook                         206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates         MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.            fax: [phone]
Redmond, WA  98052-5378    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Meanwhile, the estimated repair deadline was
several hours ago. Does anyone know if service is now restored?   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 02 Jul 93 08:19:38 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN


[e-mail] (sohl,william h) writes:

> Actually, when you consider that you get 2 B channels (64Kb each) and
> a D channel (16Kb packet), you end up with a considerably improved
> data environment than anything you can do today on POTS.  Anyone that
> currently uses a modem from home, even if it is a 9.6Kb modem (and
> most home operations are more along the 4.8, 2.4 and 1.2Kb range)
> you'll see a minimum five times improvement in file transfer and
> interactive screen display activity, etc.  Most home users would see
> an increase in throughput rate just using the 16Kb packet D channel.

Most, that is, who are used to 1200 or 2400 baud.  The rest would only
"see" the difference in statistics generated during connections.

But data is not everyone's home activity.  The bulk of home telephone
use over ISDN would merely serve as a vehicle to charge for services
not charged for before.

> Anyway, I'm obviously biased towards ISDN having been involved in its
> North American germination and now deployment for almost 10 years, but
> I don't see anything on the immediate horizon (within 10 years) that
> is likely to provide such a significant capability enhancement to the
> average telephone user without a significant change (e.g. deployment
> of fiber) in the "last mile" of local loop plant facilities.

But let's not forget that that "significant change" is one for the
worse.  Fiber can be considered to deliver a significantly *inferior*
grade of service than copper, and as such should be accompanied by a
*DECREASE* in rates.  How come no one at Bellcore, or the BOC's, want
to address THAT issue?


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #442
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19345;
          3 Jul 93 5:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10582
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 03:36:34 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32106
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 03:35:34 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 03:35:34 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #443

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 03:35:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 443

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Caller ID via 800 Number (Charles Stephens)
    Re: Caller ID via 800 Number (Larry Colton)
    Re: Australia -> US Calls (Khee Chan)
    Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology (Laird Broadfield)
    Re: *6n Codes (Actually, Vertical Services Codes) (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: TelCo's Line Protector - How Good? (Michael D. Sullivan)
    Re: Value Added Voice Services (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Were You a Victim of 900 Abuse? (Jim Rees)
    Re: Tropez 900MHz Digital Cordless Phone (Darren Alex Griffiths)
    Re: Sprint Does it Again! (John Macdonald)
    Re: WATS Service in Oregon in 1989 (Paul Robinson)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
 All article submissions MUST be sent to our email address: telecom@eecs.
nwu.edu -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Charles Stephens (ast GA uucpMC - exp 1/9/93))
Subject: Re: Caller ID via 800 Number
Date: 2 Jul 1993 23:41:35 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Dept of Math and CS


Russ Latham ([e-mail]) wrote:

> You have an 800 number with ANI, and let's say you live in an area
> that doesn't have Caller-ID yet.  If you were receiving harrassing
> calls on your residential line, could you call-forward that
> residential number to the 800 number, and then take the calls from
> there and determine who was calling you?

[Some stuff deleted]

> Moderator's Note: I am not sure. What you are suggesting is IMHO a
> very convoluted approach to solving the problem of harassing phone
> calls you cannot identify.  PAT]

    If you are receiving harrasing calls, call your telco's
business office and explain the situation.  They might be able to
place a limited time trace on all calls you receive.  You personally
won't get the number, but the proper authorities will ...


Charles Stephens      [e-mail]
DISCLAIMER: I am a guest a Emory's Math and CS Dept., all opinions expressed,
except those quoted by others, are my own, and not those of said organization.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Larry Colton)
Subject: Re: Caller ID via 800 Number
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 03:41:44 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> our Virtual Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Most ANI is supplied on a delayed basis, with your
> bill at the end of the month. It can be supplied at the time the call
> is delivered, but this does not happen too often except in the case of
> very large customers.

Pat, I recently discovered an interesting and effective use of
real-time 800 ANI that I don't recall seeing being mentioned here.
Many national retail chains use regional advertisements and rather
than print store locations and hours, they list an 800 number to call
for the nearest store.

I called one recently, I can't recall for sure but I think it was
Target, fully expecting to enter my ZIP code.  Instead I was
immediately greeted with the information about the store the computer
felt was closest to me.

There are obvious advantages and disadvantages to this scheme.  You
don't need a touchtone pad to get the information, but you better be
calling from or near home.


Larry    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Organization: ESOC European Space Operations Centre
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 04:25:07 CET
From: Khee Chan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Australia -> US Calls


When I was travelling in Australia in 1991, I found that the cheapest
way was to buy a large denomination phone card to make direct dial
calls to the US.  The direct dial rates are considerably cheaper than
the USA Direct rates which are priced more like operator assisted
rates, i.e. $x for first three min, $y per subsequent min. Certainly
for the large cities, there should be no problems finding public
phones which accept such cards. Of course, if you want to have your
phone conversation in the comfort and privacy of your hotel room or
wherever you are staying, then you will have to pay for the privilege.
Even then, I am sure the big hotels would have them in their lobbies
though I cannot be 100% certain because I stayed with relatives and
friends when I was in Sydney and Melbourne.

Oh - the Australian phone card is not the same as your AT&T/Sprint/MCI/
Telco phone card. It works more like European ones, i.e. you pre-pay a
fixed amount for a certain number of call units and they get deducted
by the phone during the course of your call.


Khee Chan
BITNET/EARN: kchan@esoc, kchan@caltech     SPAN: jplsp::kchan
INTERNET: [e-mail], [e-mail]
I speak for no-one, and no-one speaks for me. Sometimes not even myself!

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Mouthpiece Disconnected as Accident of Technology
Date: 02 Jul 93 20:28:30 GMT


In <[e-mail]> Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
writes:

> That the mouthpiece is disconnected IS an accident of technology.  If
> ringing current reached a carbon mike, it would damage it; same for
> traditional earpieces, in fact.  As a result it was important to keep
> these items off the line when ring current might be present.

[etc....]

> No such constraints exist today.  Certainly, an ISDN phone could
> easily be set up to forward voice from the mouthpiece no matter what
> the "switchhook" state is [...]

Indeed, several vendors of electronic sets (AT&T for sure, and I seem
to recall others) offer sets with "positive microphone disconnect",
where the microphone is disconnected by a mechnical switch when the
"switchhook" is depressed.  This is for those folks operating in
environments where their SOP's require this sort of thing ...

(Maybe we shouldn't call it a "switchhook" any more?  :-)


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: *6n Codes (Actually, Vertical Services Codes)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 04:13:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> David A. Cantor <cantor@
mv.MV.COM> writes:
Re Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 411, Message 13 of 14:

>> Call Forwarding: start    *72        1172
>> Call Forwarding: cancel   *73        1173
>> Speed Calling             *74        1174

> Here in Nashua, New Hampshire (in New England Telephone land), these
> codes are dialled as 72#, 73#, and 74# (thought the equivalent 117n
> codes also work).  Also, 74# is used for Speed Calling-8, but 75# is
> used for Speed Calling-30.

Funny you should mention it.  My wife just moved her office from one
served by a 1AESS to one served by a 5ESS (5E5 right now, I think).
She used an answering service at the old location and it did not
support call forwarding-don't answer, so she dialed 72# to initiate
forwarding.  It was only reliable if the answering service answered
the ring that resulted.  With the 5E, the code has changed to *72.
This is all New England Telephone in the Boston area.

I don't think she or I would have caught on to this had I not read
this thread in the Digest!


[Moderator's Note: Well Fred, when the day comes *you* can learn
something from all the stuff that appears here, then I know I must be
doing something right with the Digest!  :)    PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael D. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: TelCo's Line Protector - How Good?
Organization: The Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 04:21:10 GMT


In <[e-mail]> Bob Kupiec <olwejo![e-mail]>
writes:

> I remember a debate about surge suppression on telephone lines and I
> was wondering if what the TelCo put on the line is adequate?  It is a
> small black object (about 3"x2"x2") with tip and ring from telco and
> my tip and ring connected to the SAME lugs.  There is a ground lug
> which is grounded.

> There are two white "caps" on it marked "AT&T 11B2A".  The back of the
> device has the following: "Western Electric -- Line Protector -- UL
> Listed"

> Does anyone know what this is?  Is it standard?  Will it protect my
> line and the devices attached to it? (i.e. phones, modem, computer, if
> line struck by lightning).

This was standard in old work.  It is not designed to protect delicate
equipment or suppress transient surges reliably.  Get a good telephone
line surge suppressor and put it between your modem and the phone
line, at the very least.  You might want to get one for the whole
house, for that matter.


Michael D. Sullivan <[e-mail] (MIME capable)>
<[e-mail]>   <[e-mail]>

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Value Added Voice Services
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 13:08:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Keith Laaks) writes:

> I am investigating the implementation of the following 'Value Added'
> telephone services:

>  1. Charge card (Automated Telephone Credit Card System)
>  2. Voicemail
>  3. Virtual Telephone
>  4. Information Services (audiotext)

> Any information which may help to answer the following questions, will
> be highly appreciated.

> 1. When a client phones the Charge Card service, he/she has to key in
> an ID number and password from a tone telephone. Handheld devices are
> available that will intercept these tones and display the ID and
> secret number. What stops people from obtaining a card-calling
> client's information using this equipment and then to make calls which
> will be billed to the unsuspecting client's account?

Nothing except existing wiretap laws that make it illegal to connect
one of these devices to the phone line (in some jurisdictions, at
least ...)

> 2. When making calls from some hotel rooms, all the numbers dialed are
> intercepted, printed out, and used by hotel staff when calculating
> your bill. When you dial the card-calling service, your ID (or
> card-number) AND your secret number, is also printed out.

Actually, it isn't.  The hotel switch receives only the tones used to
reach the card service provider.  It then cuts through the voice path,
and the remaining tones are sent directly to the card service
provider.  If the hotel were to monitor and intercept those tones, it
would be in violation of those same wiretap laws.

> 3. Some card-calling services require you to go via an operator if you
> are phoning from abroad. This time you give all the required
> information to the operator. Somebody (hotel or even telco staff)
> could be listening in on the call and get hold of all your info.

Or, somebody could be standing a meter behind you listening to what
you say.  Someone could be fifty meters away across a train terminal
watching you through binoculars as you key in the card number and PIN.
Welcome to the wonderful world of calling card fraud.

> What do service providers do to prevent these types of fraud?

For the most part, they monitor for "unusual" calling patterns.  I
don't know what types of patterns AT&T monitors for, and even if I
did, it's almost certainly proprietary information, but speaking
*very* generally the kinds of things watched for are order-of-
magnitude increases in usage, large numbers of outbound international
calls, and large numbers of calls made in sequence (start time of one
call is within a minute of the end time of the preceding call, for say
fifty calls over the course of eight hours ...)  Additionally, call
destinations are sometimes scanned -- certain international
destinations are common points to which fraudulent calls are made.

When a fraud detection trigger is hit, the service provider can contact
the cardholder to inquire about the usage or can autonomously disable
the card.  Different providers do different things.

> 4. What growth trends can be expected from these services. What
> percentage of a country's population actually subscribes to the above
> services. In which sectors of the economy are these services popular?
> (i.e. Corporate, small business, home, wealthy, middle-class, etc.)

I don't know, and even if I did, I couldn't tell you ... ;-)


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!goofy!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Were You a Victim of 900 Abuse?
Date: 02 Jul 1993 21:05:39 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI


I always assumed that the sex lines went through an ACD and out to
POTS lines in suburban housewive's homes, probably with distinctive
ringing to inform them of the nature of the call.  They don't really
have a bunch of women hanging around a boiler room, do they?

Of course, getting the POTS translation out of the ACD would be nearly
impossible ...


[Moderator's Note: 'They' have it both ways -- either way. A bunch of
people working out of a phone room, or sometimes calls transferred to
people at their home, etc. But if the call was transferred to someone
at home, even with distinctive ringing, finding out that number would
cause havoc for the IP, wouldn't it?  PAT]

------------------------------

From: Darren Alex Griffiths <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 93 14:08:45 PDT
Subject: Re: Tropez 900MHz Digital Cordless Phone


In comp.dcom.telecom [e-mail] writes:

> Both the handset and the base can independently be programmed to have
> one of four possible rings.

Hmm, how does this affect distinctive ringing?  I'm looking at
purchasing a 900MHz phone, but I use distinctive ringing features a
lot and would not be interested if they disappear with a cordless
phone.

> I haven't had a chance to conduct a good range test yet, though I've
> heard that it's markedly better than any of the standard 46/49Mhz
> phones.

If you have time I'd be very interested to hear the results of a range
test, also if other folk have 900MHz phones maybe they could drop a
line to the Digest or me with their range experiences.  Does anyone
know what the range is supposed to be?  I've had sales people tell me
everything under the sun, including one at Whole Earth Access who
claimed it could go up to one mile; is that really true?


Darren Alex Griffiths                [e-mail]
Senior Software Engineer             [phone] x139
Fujitsu Open Systems Solutions Inc.  Fax: [phone]
6121 Hollis Street   Emeryville, CA 94608-2092

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Macdonald)
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1993 18:28:51 -0400
Subject: Re: Sprint Does it Again!


In article <[e-mail]>:

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, I have a recommendation for US dial tone providers!
> Me! I am going to be offering a new service called 'Telepassport'
> real soon. I am very eager and anxious to get this underway, but the
> people who are setting it up keep shushing me and telling me to be
> quiet for the time being ... otherwise I would tell you more. I can tell
> anyone interested this much: international users will call my office on
> lines installed for the purpose. They will let it ring once or twice
> (best to have it ring twice to be sure I catch the signal) then hang up.

Hmm, Pat, I can recall there having been many instances where you have
disapproved of the practice of passing messages through the phone
system without paying the phone company for the use of its services
(e.g. calling collect with a phony name, and the recipient refuses the
call since the phony name provided the desired message).

Is this system not a variant on the same theme?  Someone calls your
equipment to pass a message to you without your answering the call and
thus causing their call to get billed by their phone company.

I suspect that I am missing something here.  Do you set up special
arrangements with the foreign phone company before you commence
operations with customers in that country?


John Macdonald     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, we are going to be using international toll-
free (ie 800) lines from AT&T. The foreign telco won't be out anything
one way or the other. Plus, AT&T is going to be handling all our
traffic, both on the return call to the subscriber and on his outbound
call through our system. Each customer will call *his personal* number
to reach us. We see his line ringing here; call him back and extend
USA dialtone. If he is not at his usual abode, that's fine also. Then
he calls another 800 number and is answered by USA dialtone. He has to
punch in his account code in that case. We will also be taking calls
in for customers on this end and forwarding them anywhere in the world
the subscriber tells us he can be reached. This will be sort of like
the AT&T Easy Reach 700 program in the sense that the called party
will decide if he wants to pay for the call or let the caller pay for
it. We will be offering conference call arrangements. The computer
will talk to the subscriber in the language of his choice; he will
press touchtone buttons to pick the desired language out of seven or
eight possible.  And although the first minute will be a little
expensive the second and subsequent minutes will be about six and a
half cents per six second increments; or 65 cents per minute.  There
will be no open account billing: subscribers will work from a debit
account and this will be replenished in agreed upon amounts at agreed
upon intervals either by 'CheckFree' (the EFT service I use presently
for the sale of Talk Tickets when requested) or by bank drafts or
wire transfer, etc.  More details and an official announcement in a
week or so.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 04:38:30 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: WATS Service in Oregon in 1989
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Mark Nichols asks:

> I am involved in a litigation investigation that hinges on the
> nature of outbound WATS services that were available in Oregon in
> the 1989-90 timeframe.

1.  Write the state PUC and ask for a 1989 (1) list of all exchange
companies in Oregon; (2) list of all interexchange companies known by
it to have been operating in Oregon, and if available, cities
connected.

2.  See if you can find a library with 1989 phone books for Oregon
that you could look up this information.

3.  Write each of the local exchange companies and ask them who
connected to them for this service.  You may or (probably) may not get
an answer.

4.  If this *is* in litigation and you can afford the cost, subpoena
each exchange company for a list of all interexchange companies
connected to it for outdial (10xxx).

5.  Using the list from 1 or 5, ask the Interexchange companies if
they provided this service.  If you can't get a response, you may have
to subpoena them.  They may want you to pay $.50 per page or purchase
a tariff subscription at some ridiculous rate.

6.  If you have to ask for something that might cost money, ask for
the absolute minimum you need and try to make it something as general
as possible.  For example, asking what the maximum and minimum charges
for the service were is more likely to get a non-subpoenaed response
than asking "What was the rate from Corvallis to Bend at 6:59 am on
the fourth Thursday in November?" (Corvallis and Bend are towns in
Oregon.)


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #443
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01485;
          3 Jul 93 16:59 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17185
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 14:44:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00061
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 14:43:36 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 14:43:36 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #444

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 14:43:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 444

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on Collect Call (E Greenberg)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on Collect Call (John Levine)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on Collect Call (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Why -48V on Local Loop? (Bud Couch)
    Re: Why -48V on Local Loop? (Pat Turner)
    Re: Step-by-Step Offices (Lee S. Parks)
    Re: Step-by-Step Offices (Pat Turner)
    Re: Modem/Fax Fixture For Cellphones (Dr. Dave J. Harvey)
    Re: ESS Cut-Over in Toronto (Jeff Miller)
    Re: Time Signals via Modem (Dale Farmer)
    Re: Caller-ID and Blocking (Dave Reynolds)
    Re: Meter Reading Question (John Rice)
    Re: Diodes and Dialing (Brian T. Vita)
    Re: 900 Service Provider Get Rich Scam? (George Wang)
    Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland (Bill Bailey)
    Re: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Alpha Pager Protocol Specifications (Andy Sherman)

                     ----------------------
TELECOM Digest is an e-journal devoted mostly -- but not exclusively --
to discussions on voice telephony. The Digest is a not-for-profit
public service published frequently by Patrick Townson Associates. PTA
markets a no-surcharge telephone calling card and a no monthly fee 800
service.  In addition, we are resellers of AT&T's Software Defined
Network. For a detailed discussion of our services, write and ask for
the file 'products'.

The Digest is delivered at no charge by email to qualified subscribers on
any electronic mail service connected to the Internet. To join the mail-
ing list, write and tell us how you qualify: [e-mail].
 All article submissions MUST be sent to our email address: telecom@eecs.
nwu.edu -- NOT as replies to comp.dcom.telecom.

Back issues and numerous other telephone-related files of interest are
available from the Telecom Archives, using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
Login anonymous, then 'cd telecom-archives'. At the present time, the
Digest is also ported to Usenet at the request of many readers there,
where it is known as 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Use of the Digest does not
require the use of our products and services. The two are separate.
All articles are the responsibility of the individual authors. Organi-
zations listed, if any, are for identification purposes only. The
Digest is compilation-copyrighted, 1993. **DO NOT** cross-post articles
between the Digest and other Usenet or alt newsgroups. Do not compile
mailing lists from the net-addresses appearing herein.  Send tithes and
love offerings to PO Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690. :)  Phone: [phone].

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 17:47:58 GMT


One of the things that an operator did when processing a collect call
was act as a filter for messages passed in the caller's name, which
resulted in a message passed but a rejected call.

For instance, with the old system, you couldn't call collect from,
let's say, "Home Safe" or "Needa Ride."  While AT&T may have a plan
for managing this, it's not gonna be as foolproof as the old way.


Ed Greenberg    [e-mail]    Ham Radio: KM6CG

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 03 Jul 93 09:29 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
Organization: I.E.C.C.


Steve Forrette notes that AT&T's new collect call technique, which
doesn't get the caller's name until the callee answers, saves operator
time by not making the operator hang around and wait while the phone
rings.

A year or two ago, an article in the AT&T TJ (successor to the BSTJ)
described how the OSPS operator system worked.  One of the new
features was split call handling.  For collect calls, an operator
answered when you dial 0 + number, found that you wanted to call
collect, got your name, and released the line.  Later, when the call
was answered, another operator came on the line and asked whether the
call is accepted, using the caller's name obtained before.

Evidently AT&T has since changed to have the second operator get the
name.  I can think of two possible reasons:

1) Transmitting the caller's name from the first operator to the
second didn't work very well.  I believe that they saved a little
digitized speech, so the second operator had to listen to that and
repeat it.  The new way, there's no listening or repeating, and no
garbling when the name is hard to understand or pronounce.

2) Voice recognition systems are getting to the point where the first
operator's job, recognizing the word "collect" or a synonym for it,
can be automated.

So how automated is 1-800-COLLECT?  And has anyone been able to pry
the pricing out of MCI?  Is it more expensive than 10222-0-number?


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 13:48:23 EDT
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


Sigh.  I've posted about this before, but people forget facts and
prefer legend.

About a year ago (while still at AT&T) I trained as a replacement OSPS
operator when a strike looked likely.  Here is the real,
honest-to-goodness, no speculation progress of a collect call.  This
may have changed already or will change as speech recognition is added
to the network.  The two operator system is done to reduce the
operator's holding time.  I'm pretty sure that a single switch will
maintain control of the entire call progress (to be sure, check any
articles in the AT&T Technical Journal on OSPS), and that both
operators on the call will be in positions controlled by that switch.

You dial 0 + NPA-NXX-XXXX.  The operator comes on and says "AT&T, How
may I help you?" (or the greeting of the month).  You say "Collect,
please", and the operator tells you to hold AND RELEASES THE CALL.
There is no point in his/her getting your name, since any operator in
the center is equally likely to get the second part of the call
progress.

The switch connects you to the dialed number, leaving the voice path
back to you open, so you can hear the call progress and hang up on a
no answer.  (The voice path from you is *not* open).

When the call supervises, it goes to the first available operator.
The operator says, "AT&T with a collect call from, (caller please
state your name)", opens the voice path from you, you say your name,
and then your voice path is probably closed.  The operator then asks,
"would you like to pay for the call."  If the answer is yes, s/he
releases the call.  If it's no, s/he releases the called end and tells
you the bad news.

This system was not designed to piss off customers or any nefarious
stuff like that.  After watching it in action, it was clear that this
system was designed to keep operators *VERY* busy.  (Well, except for
the voice path games, which were designed to keep you from passing
messages for free).

The OSPS console, incidentally is one slick piece of design work.  It
allows operators to handle calls for AT&T and various LECs from the
same position in the same shift, while giving enough information to
keep one from flubbing the job or mis-branding the call.


Andy Sherman
Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."


[Moderator's Note: Now what would happen if when the call supervised,
for a few seconds all operator positions were busy? That is, my phone
rings, I answer, John Doe is waiting to call me collect. He hears me
answer but his talking path is not open. Ideally at the instant of
supervision an operator should be brought on the line, no?  What
happens if there is no operator available for five or ten seconds? Do
John and I sit and scream 'hello' at each other trying to make the
other one hear us, or do either I or John or both of us get any sort
of 'stand by for an operator' message? I would suppose as a courtesy
the complete talk path would open, and the two of us would converse
even for a very few seconds as a courtesy to us until an operator was
available to cut in on the line and complete the formalities?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bud Couch)
Subject: Re: Why -48V on Local Loop?
Organization: ADC Kentrox Industries, Inc.
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 04:45:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> Pretty much from memory, so it's bound to be wrong somewhere ...

Pretty much as my memory as well, with one addition (not correction
;-)), The actual value, 48V (and 24V) are an accident of physics. They
are multiples 1.5 (approx) volts, the fully charged voltage of a
lead-acid cell.


Bud Couch - ADC Kentrox    [e-mail] (192.228.32.43)
insert legalistic bs disclaimer here

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 13:27 EDT
Subject: Re: Why -48V on Local Loop?


Yee-Lee Shyong writes:

> When I read the articles about telephony, they all said that the
> voltage used on subscriber is -48V. But from the viewpoint of power,
> it's not very economical for system. Does anyone know the reason why
> telephone company chose the value as standard? I think that -10V is
> enough to drive a telephone line.

It's not.  In order to provide enough current for loop supervision and
some DC power (voltage drop) for the POTS instrument, you must drive
the loop with 48 VDC.  For in-house PBX circuits, 24 VDC is offen used.
For a few long lines, 96 VDC.

Typical Tip to Ring voltages at the customer demarc may be in the range
of 10 V.

I would immagine much more of the battery plant capacity supplies the
switch and network equipiment than drives the loop.  A subscriber only
pulls loop current when that are off hook.  For residential lines,
this amounts to less then 10% of the time during the busy hour.
Commercial users use more erlangs, but their lines are less likely to
come in on a metalic facility.


Pat Turner  KB4GRZ   FAA Telecommunications   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Lee S. Parks)
Subject: Re: Step-by-Step Offices
Date: 03 Jul 1993 16:12:52 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Well believe it or not, right in the heart of lower Manhattan is a
step-by-step exchange in the Broad Street CO.  It services 212-820 and
I'm sure what other prefixes.  If you have DID (as my office does) in
212-820 it takes over 20 seconds to complete the call.  NY Tel gives
conflicting dates as to when this old switch will be replaced.


lee ([e-mail])

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 19:30 EDT
Subject: Re: Step-by-Step Offices


> Are there anymore step-by-step offices in the US?  My mother said that
> the last SxS switch in Maine was retired not too long ago.  How sad.

Alltel in GA has several outside Athens.  They are slowly being
replaced by 5ESS ORM (Optical Remote Modules).  Don't know if the GTE
deal will cause them to upgrade or not.  The FAA still has Step
switches in our centers.  The reliability is probably better than ANY
SPC switch from the FAA's POV. (No common point of failure, save the
battery plant.)

D4 channel banks allow the LECs to provide SS circuits out of a Step
office.  CLASS and custom calling features don't sell as well in rural
areas, so there isn't a lot of incentive to upgrade.


Pat Turner  KB4GRZ FAA Telecommunications  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Dr D J Harvey <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 06:05:50 +0100
Subject: Re: Modem/Fax Fixture For Cellphones (Eur
Organization: University of Wales College of Medicine


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Alfredo Cotroneo) writes:

> I would appreciate receiving information on the availability of such
> interfaces (model number, and price in your currency) for major brand
> cellular phones, since it might be possible to buy the interface
> abroad (just the interface), if the cellular set is available in Italy
> (e.g models from Motorola, Nokia, OKI, Ericson, etc.). I would like
> not to buy the car-boster/kit to have this feature, but rather have it
> for use with a laptop PC outside the car.

Having looked into this myself recently I find an NEC model, available
as either car mounted or hand-portable for which an interface for
external devices could be fitted. Of course, the model sold here has a
UK style jack-socket, but given that its an expansion module rather
than in-built, I presume that thiss is modified to local needs.  Check
with an NEC dealer.


Dave Harvey    ([e-mail])  tel: [phone]
Dept Radiology, University Hospital of Wales, Heath Park, Cardiff CF4 4XW, UK

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Miller)
Subject: Re: ESS Cut-Over in Toronto
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 13:21:00 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Lester Hiraki <lester.hiraki@
canrem.com> writes:

> On the morning of Saturday, June 26, 1993 the last analog switch in
> Toronto, Canada was retired.  The Northern Electric ESS which served
> NPA-NXX's 416-960, 416-961, 416-962 and 416-967 was replaced by a
> Northern Telecom DMS-100 Supernode.

> I had the privilege of observing the cutover that morning.  About 20
> craftspersons were poised with their shears.  Each aisle and cable cut
> point of the ESS was carefully marked with red tape.  A final check
> was made to ensure there were no 911 calls in progress.  At 3:27 AM
> battery was cut and the signal was given to begin cutting the cables.
> There was a five minute flurry of activity as the craftspersons
> sheared the cables.

 Reminds me of the Scott AFB DMS-100 cutover from a (real old) SxS.
The inside plant troops had marked all the linefinder and connector
cables with red tape to indicate the cut points.  At the appointed
hour (0001, 16 Aug 85), we scurried around the office with cable
cutters, cutting the cables while the NTI folks pulled the cutover
plugs on their side.

What was rather eerie about the operation was that some of the step
switches kept rattling away for about an hour after all the cables
were cut.  I guess the ghost of Strowger wasn't quite ready to
leave ...;-).

If I recall correctly, we had the new office up and running in six
minutes flat.


Jeff Miller,  NH6ZW/N8,  AFA1HE (ex WD6CQV, AFA8JM, AFA1DO)
AFIT School of Engineering, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: Time Signals via Modem
Date: 3 Jul 1993 16:11:11 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


Alfredo Cotroneo ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am writing software which would get the (atomic) time signal from
> sources which deliver that via modem. Is there a list of phone numbers

    For US residents you can get a piece of software ($39.00) from
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that will
run on a IBM style PC with a modem.  It calls a number, exchanges data
for a minute or so, and then sets the clock on your PC to an accuracy
of a couple thousandths of a second (more accurate than your PC can
measure without special gear). This is intended for scientific
applications, but a guy I know got it for a school project is how I
know about it.  I think you have to tell the program the lat/long of
where you are so it can give you true local time, not just time zone
time.


Dale Farmer

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Reynolds)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Blocking
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 17:53:33 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics, Portland, Oregon


I find it very ironic that the only "anonymous" call (which is what
blocked calls show as here) that we've gotten was from Western Carpet
Cleaning.  My wife answered the phone and asked them why they had
their number blocked.  Long pause ... "Uh, we don't want people
calling in on this number."  Right.


[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Meter Reading Question
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 93 15:02:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ted
Dodd) writes:

> How does a meter reading scheme that uses dialup phone technology
> work?  It apparently calls the meter on the same line used by the
> customer and does this at 0200 without ringing the phone.  Please
> explain.

The meter reading equipment is installed in the Central Office and
accesses the customers line through 'test access' trunks. These allow
a metallic connection to the subscriber line without ringing the line.
The switching path is completely separate from that used for switching
subscriber calls.


John Rice   K9IJ   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 03 Jul 93 00:59:02 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Diodes and Dialing


In an amusing previous posting, someone described how they beat the
restriction on out-bound calls by bypassing a diode which had been
placed in the telephone to block such calls.

As I recall, the diode was placed in series with the dial.  The mag
switch bridged the diode allowing DC to pass through to the dial.


Brian T. Vita           CSS, Inc.       CI$70702,2233

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (George Wang)
Subject: Re: 900 Service Provider Get Rich Scam?
Date: 03 Jul 1993 20:07:04 GMT
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Reply-To: [e-mail] (George Wang)


In a previous article, TELECOM Moderator noted in reply:

> Unlike the big three in the industry, AT&T, MCI and Sprint who will
> *NOT* extend billing and collection services to the three big, profitable
> 'services' offered on 900 lines -- sex, religion and open chat --
> most of the bureaus like PASE and Integretel will go along with what-
> ever you put on your line as long as it is not too kinky, illegal or
> obviously fraudulent. Avalon Communications in Ft. Lauderdale, FL will
> put you in business with *three* 900 services -- 'Dateline', astrology
> and sports -- for $99 in total. You need to nothing but advertise your
> 900 numbers; they provide all the data bases and messages, etc. You
> call in to check the call count as you wish on a POTS line; commission
> checks issued monthly. Call 800-945-6500, speak with Steve.   PAT]

I just called Avalon and was told by Steve that it's $99/year for only
one of the three services. You would have to pay $99/each extra for
the other two. Does anyone know how successful these things are given
that one must do their own advertising? If one considered putting a
small ad in a local newspaper/dating personals paper, what kind of
response could one expect?


George Wang - Email: [e-mail]
STANDARD DISCLAIMER: All opinions and statements are mine only!


[Moderator's Note: Well if you can't make back your $99 the first
month, you really should not be in the business!  I'd think you could
do your advertising pretty inexpensively with printed flyers, etc.
For $99, it seems to me to be a quick, easy way to go into business
for yourself as an 'Information Provider'. $8 per month for the line
and $100 or so in advertising each month. Three or four calls per day
would allow you to break even. When you talked to Avalon, I hope you
told them you heard about them in the Digest. I promised him I would
relay information about his operation.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: '900' Numbers in Czech Republic and Poland
Date: 3 Jul 1993 00:17:32 GMT
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston IL


I worked for the phone company (EuroTel/former state PTT) in the Czech
Republic. I can find out the details of 900 numbers if anyone is
interested.


later,

Bill   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Yes, a more detailed report would be welcome.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 11:23:39 EDT
Subject: Re: Internet -> ATT Mail Delays
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 25 Jun 93 18:10:17 GMT, [e-mail] (David Appell) said:

[ Complaints about slow service between the internet and AT&T Mail ]

I will try to answer this without betraying my former employer's
(Mother, of course) proprietary information.  If one uses nslookup or
dig to query the internet nameservers for the domain attmail.com, one
finds that all the mail relay hosts are in the domain att.com and that
they are the same as the mail relay hosts for the domain att.com.  No
hosts for the domain attmail.com are listed.

This tells you that the AT&T Mail service seems to be dependent on the
gateways into AT&T (mostly Bell Labs) for their internet forwarding.
You may draw your own conclusions from this information.


Andy Sherman   Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 11:06:05 EDT
Subject: Re: Alpha Pager Protocol Specifications
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 26 Jun 93 03:06:00 GMT, [e-mail] said:

> I have a paper copy of the "Telocator Alphanumeric Protocol".

> (From the cover letter:)

> "This protocol is typically used for the input of numeric,
> alphanumeric, or tone only pages sent from a computer device to a
> central paging terminal.  These systems use an autodialer and a Bell
> 103 modem."

This document is already in the telcom archives as ixo.tap.protocol,
along with some interesting software contributed by Tom Limoncelli of
Mentor Graphics.


Andy Sherman   Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #444
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02111;
          3 Jul 93 17:44 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05542
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 15:37:31 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22820
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 15:37:01 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 15:37:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #445

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 15:37:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 445

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Dialing "1" First (Charles Stephens)
    Re: New York Telephone Outage (John Hawkinson)
    Re: Australia -> US Calls (Michael Jennings)
    Re: Two AT&T Questions (Nathan Glasser)
    Re: "SPC" Xbar (was Re: Step-by-Step Offices) (Steve Gaarder)
    Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG) (Jan Ceuleers)
    Re: Fax/Modem/Voice Line Sharing (Reid Goldsborough)
    Re: Lightning, EMP, and Terro (Paul Houle)
    Re: Western Union Says Opiniongrams Work (Alan Boritz)
    Re: AT&T Product Acronyms Question (Mike King)
    Re: Only in Texas (K. Husain)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Charles Stephens)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Date: 3 Jul 1993 15:30:15 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Dept of Math and CS


Brett Frankenberger ([e-mail]) wrote:

> [e-mail] (Peter Alan Dutton) writes:

>> I do realize that local calling areas are MUCH smaller, populationwise
>> and areawise, in New England than in Metro New York (compare the local
>> calling areas of Nassau County, New York, and Raymond, Maine), so why
>> the "1"?

>> Similarly, if I don't realize that a phone number I am calling is in
>> Worcester, and I dial a "1" first because I think I'm being clever by
>> trying to avoid the recorded message, they tell me that I have to call
>> the number again, and this time without the "1". Again, I ask, if they
>> know I don't have to dial the "1", then why don't they know enough to
>> connect me?

> By enforcing the correct "dial 1" rules, the telco switch is able to
> make sure you know if the call is toll or not.  If you just dial
> XXX-XXX, that means (to the switch) that you don't think the call is
> toll.  If you are wrong, the switch will tell you by informing you
> that you must dial 1 (and the reverse applies also).  Since some
> people care if the call is toll or not, and can't remembner exactly
> where is and is not toll, this helps them.  Of course, if you simply
> call where you need to without regard for LD charges, then this kind
> of gets in the way ...

In the 404 and 706 area codes (North Georgia), all the toll calls
require no only the "1", but the area code, even if it the same as
your own.  Southern Bell claims this is due to the overloaded switches
they have (since 404 has one of the country's largest LATAs, there are
a lot of calls SB has to handle in a day I presume).  It's not to
uncommon to get the fast busy signal when calling your neighbor,
though recently it has been getting better.


Charles Stephens    [e-mail]
 DISCLAIMER: I am a guest a Emory's Math and CS Dept., all opinions expressed,
except those quoted by others, are my own, and not those of said organization.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Hawkinson)
Subject: Re: New York Telephone Outage
Date: 3 Jul 1993 13:37:22 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> Christopher Zguris <0004854540@mcimail.
com> writes:

> With this cable break in place, what would happen if someone in 914
> tried to call a business in 212 on an 800 number provided by someone
> other than NY Telephone (MCI, SPRINT, ETC.)? Likewise, what would
> happen in the same situation using one of the local 800 numbers NY
> Telephone tries to push on its customers?

Hmm ... while I don't know about your specific question, I have a
personal 800 from Sprint which connects to my 914 number. At the
beginng of the outage, I tried to call it from 212, and got the same
response as calling my 914 number via NYT (i.e. all circuits busy).

> [Moderator's Note: I suppose if the wires handling the call went
> through that cable the call would not go through. 800 numbers are
> nothing special  .... they travel over a wire pair also.   PAT]

I didn't actually try making the call using Sprint (I used AT&T), but
I do wonder if they would have successfully carried the call.

In another message, our Moderator asks if the problem has been
repaired.  Well, limited service was working as early as 3 AM on
Thursday (day after the cable cut), but when I called them Thursday
afternoon, they said they were still working on the problem. I haven't
inquired since.


John Hawkinson     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: First of all, you get no choice whatsoever in how
your calls to an 800 number are routed. They go from your telco to the
carrier which handles that particular 800 number. Stuff like 10xxx has
no bearing or influence whatsoever on calling 800-xxx. It is the carrier
of record for the number which gets the call. If the 800 number is ser-
vice by Sprint, then Sprint gets the call; if by AT&T, then AT&T gets
the call. There is but a pair of wires (or more) which comes to your
premises from the telco central office, which is where all carriers
and telcos alike do business: in the CO serving you. Whatever carrier
you requested to handle your call, whatever 10xxx you specify, it
starts from your CO (or winds up there if you are receiving a call.)

If the wires from the CO to your premises are cut, or the wires which
connect the CO to other COs are cut, then the call will not complete.
Now it is different if the cut is peculiar to a given long distance
carrier; then that carrier's traffic will be disrupted, but the use of
an alternate 10xxx may well allow your call to complete. But if the
disrupted long distance carrier handles the 800 number in particular,
then no amount of dialing is going to complete the call, and likewise
as mentioned above, if the disruption is in common equipment or plant
used by all carriers, ie your local office and its wiring or outside
plant, then all carriers attempting to pass traffic there or receive
traffic from there will be thwarted.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Jennings)
Subject: Re: Australia -> US Calls
Organization: University of Cambridge, DAMTP
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 19:46:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Khee Chan <KCHAN@ESOC.
bitnet> writes:

>> When I was travelling in Australia in 1991, I found that the cheapest
>> way was to buy a large denomination phone card to make direct dial
|> calls to the US.  The direct dial rates are considerably cheaper than
|> the USA Direct rates which are priced more like operator assisted
>> rates, i.e. $x for first three min, $y per subsequent min. Certainly
>> for the large cities, there should be no problems finding public
>> phones which accept such cards. Of course, if you want to have your
>> phone conversation in the comfort and privacy of your hotel room or
>> wherever you are staying, then you will have to pay for the privilege.
>> Even then, I am sure the big hotels would have them in their lobbies
>> though I cannot be 100% certain because I stayed with relatives and
>> friends when I was in Sydney and Melbourne.

>> Oh - the Australian phone card is not the same as your AT&T/Sprint/MCI/
>> Telco phone card. It works more like European ones, i.e. you pre-pay a
>> fixed amount for a certain number of call units and they get deducted
>> by the phone during the course of your call.

    A couple of things to add to this: international calls from
Australia are cheap by international standards (at least they are
vastly cheaper than calls from Europe). This is at least partly due to
the fact that international calls were handled by a separate
organisation (OTC) to that which handled domestic calls (Telecom
Australia).  Although both organisations were government owned, OTC
was small, lean and efficient, whereas Telecom was big and bloated.
Although the two organisations have now been merged (blame government
infighting for this, not considerations as to what was a good idea)
the relatively cheap costs for international calls remain.

    Secondly, Australia has coins which are worth rather more than
those in circulation in the US. The largest coin is $2, these are in
general circulation and payphones take these. Thus if you cannot find
a cardphone (this is not that likely) or do not have a phonecard,
there is usually no difficulty making an international call with
coins.

    Thirdly, phones in which you can swipe your Visa or Mastercard
can often be found. These are not as common as other types of phone,
but are by no means nonexistent.


Michael

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Nathan Glasser)
Subject: Re: Two AT&T Questions
Date: 3 Jul 1993 05:48:09 GMT
Organization: MIT LCS, Cambridge, MA


In article <[e-mail]> Paul R. Coen <PCOEN@DRUNIVAC.
DREW.EDU> writes:

> My first question is about the "evening plus" from AT&T.  For those
> who aren't familiar with it, you pay 7.50 a month for the first hour
> of evening calls (standard AT&T evening/weekend rate times).  After
> that, evening calls are ten cents/minute.

> My understanding is that Reach Out America is 8.50 a month for the
> first hour, and then evening calls are something like 12.5
> cents/minute.

I can't say I've ever heard of the "evening plus" plan before.
However, I've used Reach Out America for a number of years with the
night rate plan only, which covers from 10PM to 8AM (so starts an hour
earlier than standard night rates).

On my latest phone bill, I noticed that the rate changed. It used to
be 7.15 for the first hour, and 0.10 each additional minute. It
changed to 7.50 for the first hour, and still 0.10 each additional
minute.

I called AT&T to find out about this, and was told that the first hour
rate did indeed increase, but the plan also changed. The "night rates"
now start at 7PM instead of 10PM.

This sounds very similar to what you described as the "evening plus"
plan, except starting at 7PM instead of, presumably, 5PM, though you
didn't say.


Nathan Glasser    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 02:14:36 -0400
From: anarres![e-mail]
Subject: Re: "SPC" Xbar (was Re: Step-by-Step Offices)


[e-mail] (Bud Couch) writes:

> North Electric (NOT Northern Electric) was at one time 92% owned by
> Ericsson and produced modified (for the US market) and original
> designed crossbar systems built around the Ericsson xbar module. The
> NX-1 was one of the modified systems.

> A number of versions of the switch had been produced, but the NX-1D
> was the version that I was familiar with when I worked there in the
> the late 60's. When I left the company in '68, a development was
> underway to counter the AT&T and AE electronic switches. One
> development was an adaption of Ericsson's spc machine, the AXE-?, and
> the other was a stopgap modification of the NX-1D, labeled the NX-1E
> for electronic).

I remember the NX-1E.  Carlisle, Pa (717-243, -249) was served by such
a beast starting in '74.  When I heard about its imminent arrival, I
thought: "it's computer-controlled.  All computer programs have bugs.
Hmmm ..."  It had bugs.  The most impressive was the occasional
addition of third parties to existing conversations.


Steve Gaarder    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jan Ceuleers)
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 11:56:48
Subject: Re: Hayes Patent (was Re: Modem Waiting for the BONG)
Organization: K12 Belgium (S-Team)


I quote [e-mail]:

> True, but there are ways to switch modes without infringing the
> patent.  The rs232 spec is full of signals that can often be used for
> this purpose (dtr, break, etc).

In my own implementation of the AT command set, I've removed escaping
altogether. My original implementation (never released) had the escape
code with guard time, but I removed it when I heard about the
Heatherington '302 patent. I didn't want to implement the TIES
(time-independent escape sequence), since I considered it unsafe.

In my application, the only thing the escape sequence might be useful
for is terminating an ongoing call (with +++ followed by ATH). This
can, however, also be achieved by dropping DTR, so that I saw no
reason for retaining the code and risking having to pay a license fee
to Hayes, even when I released my code to the public domain.

BTW: my application is a FOSSIL driver for a particular ISDN board.
The driver doesn't talk to a modem through a serial port, but to an
ISDN board through an API. In order to allow FOSSIL-utilizing
applications to work unmodified, I needed to implement a small AT
command set parser, which is what I was referring to in the above
paragraphs.

> It seems to me that if the ppp folks really wanted to produce a useful
> spec, they would have included the ability to escape '+' in their
> async map.

Alternatively, the modem could be set to use another character as the
escape character.

Hmmmm ... Perhaps TIES might be safe on 7-bit connections if you set
register S2 (the escape character) to some value above 127? ...


Jan Ceuleers    The Experimenter Board, Antwerp, Belgium
 Origin: Experimenter Board, Antwerp, Belgium  (2:292/857)

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Reid Goldsborough)
Subject: Re: Fax/Modem/Voice Line Sharing
Date: 3 Jul 93 18:00:53 GMT
Organization: Philadelphia Area Computer Society


I'd like to summarize the responses I've received from a message I
earlier posted here and elsewhere. In my message, I asked for people's
advice about the most cost/effective way to handle voice, fax, and
modem over one or two phone lines.

People suggested four different approaches:

1) Use one phone line and buy a line manager device that tries to
detect if an incoming call is a fax (some fax machines have these line
management capabilities built in).  Some people have had success with
this approach. But the downside is that for it to work, the calling
fax device has to send beeps (CNG tones), and some older (and newer
but cheaper?) fax machines don't.

2) Use one phone line, subscribe to your local phone company's
distinctive ring service, and buy a line manager device that can
distinguish between the different rings and route the incoming call to
the appropriate device. This is more foolproof than using the other
kind of line manager, and it seems to be the best lower cost solution.

The next generations of modems (and possibly some modems already on
the market) have the capability built in to distinguish between
different ringing patterns, and the next generation of fax software --
WinFax Pro in particular -- will be able to work with the distinctive
ring service. This will eliminate the need for a separate line manager
device.

3) Use one phone line and buy the Intel Satisfaxion modem, which has
line management capabilities built into it. One person says that you
experience an interruption when using it and sometimes the calling
party will think you've hung up on them. Apparently you can also set
it up to recognize distinctive rings. Don't know all the details here
though.

4) Use two phone lines. Subscribe to an extended calling plan (metro
service, etc.) on line one, and use it for outgoing calls and for faxing
and modeming. Subscribe to the cheapest plan possible for line two --
don't even get touch tone -- and use it only for incoming voice calls
(except for outgoing calls in an emergency). But use an answering
machine and call waiting for line two so you don't miss any incoming
calls.

Ask people who are faxing you something (to line one) to voice call
your line two number first. If you're using line one for BBSing, hang
up. If you want to receive faxes when you're not at home, leave your
line one fax machine or fax/modem on and ready to receive faxes.

With this approach, you do need to pay for another phone line (plus
installation), for an answering machine (if you don't already have
one), and for call waiting. But you don't need to subscribe to your
local phone company's voice mail service to get voice messages when
you're BBSing on your one phone line, and you don't need to buy a line
manager device or new fax modem with line management capabilities.

This seems to be the best (slightly) higher cost solution.

(I'll also summarize any comments or opposing viewpoints.)


Reid Goldsborough   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 12:04:00
Subject: Re: Lightning, EMP, and Terrorists


[Ben Burch mentions using a superconducting magnet for a portable EMP
enhanced bomb.]

        Actually, superconductors are quite a pain to use in mobile
applications today.  The liquid nitrogen superconductors still support
relatively small current densitiies [but improving], and the liquid
helium ones need a really fancy dual cryostat system unless you can
afford lots of liquid helium.

        It's also rather tricky to get a strong persistent current
going in a superconducting loop.  You do it by creating a strong
magnetic field going through the loop while it is functioning as a
normal conductor, chilling it a bit more, and then turning the field
off.

Actual superconducting magnet and energy storage systems use a
specially designed constant current power supply that efficiently
keeps the current going.  Prehaps you could build one that would
charge off the wallplug and keep running off a battery. (Loss in your
coil is almost nothing, but your power supply does lose power).

        Besides, since the 1950's, people in the Soviet Union and at
Los Alamos have been running one explosive generator off the output of
another one.  Your first one needs 1000 amps from a marine battery and
delivers 10 MA or so to the main stage.  The timing is a little
tricky, simply because the modern approaches to high speed electronics
are likely to get trashed by the 10 MA current.  Think like a late
1950's electrical engineer, however, and it's simple.

        Another approach to building EMP enhanced devices is to
enclose a conventional or nuclear explosive inside a material that
ionizes very easily, such as cesium.


 Origin: NETIS [phone]/432-0922 (HST/V32) (1:132/189)

------------------------------

Date: 03 Jul 93 09:25:17 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Western Union Says Opiniongrams Work


[e-mail] (Nigel Allen) writes:

> Here is a press release issued on behalf of Western Union Financial
> Services, Inc.  I downloaded the press release from the PR On-Line BBS
> in Maryland at 410-363-0834. I assume that Earle Palmer Brown is a
> company that serves as Western Union's public relations advisors.

> Survey Shows That Opiniongram Telegrams Have Impact on Capitol Hill
> To: Business Desk, Political Writers
> Contact: Peter Engel of Earle Palmer Brown, 212-463-6914

> [Moderator's Note: Western Union is desparately trying to stay in
> business. I can't blame them, but the handwriting is on the wall.

You can't expect to sell most of your body parts and expect to win a
marathon.  WU executives made some VERY poor business decisions and
sealed their fate years ago.  It's just a shame that most of the
people who made those decisions are not suffering nearly as much as
those who are left with what's left.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 03 Jul 93 08:00:50 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: AT&T Product Acronyms Question



In TELECOM Digest, V13, #434, [e-mail] (Bill
Creech) asks:

> What do the acronyms VTNS and DNS stand for?  I believe they are
> related to AT&T long distance offerings.  Thanks for the help.

VTNS = Virtual Telecommunications Network System.  My last employer
upgraded their AT&T SDN, and suddenly it became a VTNS.


Mike King           |  [phone]            |  I don't speak for my
Software Sourcerer  |  [e-mail] or           |  employer.  My employer
Fairchild Space     |  [e-mail]  |  doesn't speak for me.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (K Husain)
Subject: Re: Only in Texas
Date: 03 Jul 1993 18:51:50 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Stephanie da Silva) writes:

> The Greater Houston Yellow Pages comes in two volumes: A thru L and M
> thru Z.

> The very first entry of the 1992-93 M thru Z volume reads like this:
>
> Macaroni
> - -----
> Two Guys Who Glue Macaroni On
>  Things  510 Branard ---------- 529-8369

> I've been deathly curious to call these two guys up to find out what
> exactly it is they do, but I can never work up the nerve to do so.

It's disconnected. .... *sigh*;-(

I saw a similar listing in the Austin, residence pages by a Heanauder
Titzhoff a few years ago. Don't see him here now. If I remember
correctly some guy did answer the phone and acknowldege the name when
my roommate had called.  Found it quite by accident actually ...

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #445
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03375;
          3 Jul 93 19:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03343
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 17:05:41 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03845
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 17:05:02 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 17:05:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #446

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 17:05:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 446

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Caller ID via 800 Number (Brett Frankenberger)
    Re: Call Forward to a 1-800 Number (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Caller-ID and Blocking (Phil Wherry)
    Re: Cell/Pager Integration (Kenneth R. Crudup)
    Re: US West's ISDN? (Lynne Gregg)
    Using a Cellular on a PC Modem (Ricardo Cantu)
    Re: Why -48V on Local Loop? (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Modem/Fax Fixture for Cellphones (Europe) (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: Caller-ID and Bell Canada (Mark Brader)
    Re: 411 Connections (Kevin Paul Herbert)
    Re: 411 Danger in New Jersy (Wm. Bryant Faust, IV)
    Re: Help!!! Broken Hard Drive Shuts Down BBS (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Unable to Sustain the # Signal (Carl Moore)
    It Made Me Think Differently About Caller-ID (Brian Vita)
    Shades of the Seldon Patent (A. Padgett Peterson)
    New Phone System in Our Office (Mark Earle)
    Natick 911 Drama (Bob Frankston)
    Prefixes vs. Geography (Lauren Weinstein)
    How to Destroy a COCOT (Elana Beach)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brett Frankenberger)
Subject: Re: Caller ID via 800 Number
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 16:22:15 GMT


Russ Latham ([e-mail]) wrote:

> You have an 800 number with ANI, and let's say you live in an area
> that doesn't have Caller-ID yet.  If you were receiving harrassing
> calls on your residential line, could you call-forward that
> residential number to the 800 number, and then take the calls from
> there and determine who was calling you?

No.  There are two types of number identification.  One is Caller ID,
which returns the number of the (original) caller.  If I call your
number and your number is forwarded to someone who has Caller-ID, they
get MY number.

The other is ANI, and it returns the BILLING number for the call.
That is, it gives whoever would be paying the charges for that call.
When a person forwards their phone, they are responsible for any LD
charges on the forwarded part of the call, so their number is the
billing number.  That is, if you forward your number to a
long-distance number, and I call you, I pay LD charges from me to you
(if any), and you pay LD charges from you to wherever you forwarded
your line.  Thus, your number gets passed to the LD company as the
ANI.  Of course, when you forward your line to an 800 number, you
don't pay the charges, but the system still works the same way -- it
passes your number as ANI.  So, in short, if you did what you said
above, the ANI readout would show your number, not the number of the
person making the call.


(formerly [e-mail])  Brett Frankenberger  ([e-mail])

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 00:48 GMT
From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Call Forward to a 1-800 Number


I work as a contractor for a government agency, and I decided to try
an experiment on a couple of our lines.  We have C&P Telephone
government Centrex, so forwarding is done by the local telephone
company.

On one of the lines (call it '45') I dialed the Centrex code 173 to
clear forwarding, then dialed 172, waited for stutter, then dialed
9-1-800-235-1414.  The announcement from that company's system
announced the number (45) I was calling from (for the purposes of
setting up a call-forwarded call.) I then used another phone (Let's
call it '70'), dialed the same 9-1-800-235-1414 and got the
announcement of the phone number (70) I was calling from.

>From line '70', I then dialed the internal five digit number of the
forwarding number (45) from the other (70) line.  The announcement
came back with the phone number (45) of the forwarding line, *not* of
the number that called the call-forwarding line.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Phil Wherry)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID and Blocking
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Phil Wherry)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 13:28:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mike King)
writes:

> States that allow no call blocking: Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee,
> Virginia, West Virginia;

As of today (July 1), per-call blocking is available in Virginia.
I've tried it, and it works as expected. Blocked-number blocking is
also available (and has been for some time in the DC metro area, since
callers from DC and MD can block CID).

I don't know whether per-line blocking is available or not.


Phillip Wherry   Member of the Technical Staff
The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 03 Jul 93 11:56:01 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cell/Pager Integration
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail] Lynne Gregg <lynne.gregg@
mccaw.com> writes:
 ^^^^^^^^^

> Glad to hear your using voicemail on your cellular.  I don't know
> how anyone can cost-effectively use cellular without it.

Sure you can!

> Anyway, I use cellular the same way you were attempting to:
> 1) Let cell call roll to voicemail to screen the call or when cellphone
> is powered off (or in the car, etc.).

> 2) On receipt of voicemail, system (correct, it's Octel) outcalls to
> your Skypage (or others) to alert you.

> 3) You check voicemail, return call as convenient.

Or, an even cheaper method, especially since I don't work for the
cellular company, and don't get free airtime that my cell phone AND
voicemail eat up:

1 - Go out and get a Panasonic answering machine (or similar) that
supports incoming-message forwarding, (mine's a KX-T2634), and buy the
cheapest POTS line you can, preferably with TT and no message units.

2 - Give only *this* number out, instead of your cellular number (with
the exception of Mommy, or anyone else deemed that important :-).
Program the cell number into the "forwarding" memory position of your
answering machine.  Turn "toll saver" on. (All this becomes clear in a
minute.)

3 - When someone calls the POTS line, AND leaves a message (my unit
skips "hang ups"), the machine then calls your cellular number, and
plays your OGM over and over until you punch in your code. You then
hear your *new* (in the case of the Pana unit, anyway) messages. You
can then decide who to call back immediately, blow off, defer, etc.
The Pana (sounds like a commercial, huh :-) wil try twice, and time-
stamps your messages.

4 - If you go out of the area, or turn your phone off, and wish to see
if you got any messages, call your answering machine telephone number.
If you get more than two rings, you didn't get any messages (toll
saver),hang up. No airtime charge (unless you live in one of those
oppresive coverage areas that charge for unsupervised calls).

I use this method to stay in touch, but whittle my incoming bill to
almost nothing. Of course, I got my Pana unit four years ago, and I
don't even know if they make that one anymore, but you get the idea.


Kenneth R. Crudup, ATT BL, 1600 Osgood St, N. Andover, MA 01845-1043
MV20-3T5B, [phone].    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US West's ISDN?
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 93 10:25:00 PDT


My 2 cents ...

I don't mean to pick on US West, but nice job trying to downplay ISDN.
US West is one of the laggards on ISDN deployment.  Last year I
interviewed most of the carriers for a report on ISDN that I produced.
A few of the carriers interviewed told me that their pocketbooks were
dictating the state of ISDN deployment in their regions.
Understandable.  US West was one of these.

Executives at PacBell had the vision and determination to commit the
bucks to ISDN deployment.  ISDN's been available from the vendors for
years.  Interoperability is an issue that always gets resolved (AT&T
and NT have been working on this and probably have achieved some level
of compatibility by now).  According to users in California, PacBell is
delivering low-cost ISDN service throughout the region.

And the remarks about US West's cable ventures delivering service
competitive to ISDN ... you ARE kidding?


Lynne

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ricardo Cantu)
Subject: Using a Cellular on a PC Modem
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 03:25:13 GMT


Greetings!

    Anyone out there know how I can use a cellular phone to make calls
on my PC modem?  A friend told me all I needed was to make a straight
RJ11<=>RJ45 connector and set the cellular to off-hook dialing.  Will
this work?  Are there any other ways to do this?  Are there any
products on the market that will provide a solution to this problem?
Please send any ideas, thoughts or comments.  Also, if any of you have
accomplished this already, what is the line quality like?  Let me
know.


 RICK CANTU   The University of Texas at San Antonio  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Why -48V on Local Loop?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 20:41:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bud
Couch) writes:

 >In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

 >> Pretty much from memory, so it's bound to be wrong somewhere ...

>  Pretty much as my memory as well, with one addition (not correction
>  ;-)), The actual value, 48V (and 24V) are an accident of physics. They
>  are multiples 1.5 (approx) volts, the fully charged voltage of a
>  lead-acid cell.

Sorry, wrong chemistry.  The batteries that are a nominal 1.5 volts
are carbon-zinc cells, such as your everyday flashlight battery.
Lead-acid gives a nominal 2 volts/cell.

You can still make 24v or 48v from that, just won't need as many.


Rich Greenberg             Work: ETi Solutions, Oceanside CA 619-631-5280
N6LRT    TinselTown, USA   Play: [e-mail]           310-649-0238
I speak for myself only.       Canines: Chinook & Husky

------------------------------

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Modem/Fax Fixture For Cellphones (Europe)
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 93 10:23:00 PDT


Without a doubt, Motorola has the best data interfaces for cellular.
 Motorola has two different types of data interface for their cell
phones (note only certain phone models are "data ready" , but it's
safe to say that most new MicroTac Ultralites are fine).  Anyway,
Motorola offers two different interfaces.  I use them both.

Data cable:  the newer data interface that's designed for use with the
Compaq Speedpaq modem.  It's great.  It works for sending faxes or email.
 In fact, you're getting this posting by way of Cellular One.  I send
virtually all my faxes over it, too (WINFAX).

Data interface (black box): I use this interface at home to deliver
dial tone to Sharp FP120 fax or to attach to a Pocket Peripheral modem
connected to my home PC.  This is the more flexible of the Motorola
data interfaces since it clips to and brings dial tone to just about
anything with an RJ-11 jack.

You can probably tell.  I rarely use wire lines for voice, data, or
fax.


Lynne

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Caller ID and Bell Canada
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 11:15:42 GMT


I wrote:

> Incidentally, with Bell Canada, if you have Call Return, you are told
> the number that last called you, and given the *option* of returning
> the call.  If Call Block was used on that call, then you are told that
> the number "cannot be given out", and then given the option of
> returning the call anyway. ...

And someone asked me in email what the phone bill would show if you
decided to return the call anyway, and it did turn out to be long
distance.  I don't know, and I don't have any out-of-town friends with
Call Block to try it with.  Does anyone else here know?


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 10:38:36 -0700
From: Kevin Paul Herbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 411 Connections


 >On July 3, PacTel Cellular will change 411 to "connect you directly to
 >the requested party" for just $0.50!

When I encountered an A carrier with this feature (US West Cellular in
 San Diego), they told me that the $0.50 charge was the same as the
surcharge that they had for calling the RBOC directory assistance, so
this didn't actually cost any more to use.

My local carrier (A: Bay Area Cellular) charges me $0.50 when I call
the RBOC directory assistance (plus airtime), so it would appear to be
true that there is no price increase for offering this service to
cellular.

On Cellular, if you don't already know the number, this could actually
save you money, since you might pay less for airtime because you might
only spend 20 seconds with directory assistance ... after they connect
you, you would get an opportunity to use the remaining time in the
minute that you have already paid for.

> Sounds like an instant moneymaker to me ...

 What did PacTel Cellular charge for calling directory assistance
before this service? Perhaps they already were charging the same $0.50
surcharge, and you just didn't notice it.

 >[Moderator's Note: I dunno ... are many people really using that
 >service? Has anyone got any hard data yet from other telcos?   PAT]

The advantages for cellular are clear ... you can easily place this
sort of call while driving. I don't see much of an advantage for use
from land-line telephones.


Kevin


[Moderator's Note: But if you have to take your eyes off the road to
dial 411 on the cell phone, why not take your eyes off the road to
dial the other seven digits?  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 03 Jul 93 15:33 CDT
From: Wm. Bryant Faust, IV <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 411 Danger in New Jersy


>> Hmmm ... I wonder if one could get Warm Line programmed to dial Operator?
 >> I also wonder if you can still order Manual Service (Number Please?)

>  Warm line could be useful to the infirm if it could be programmed to
> dial 911.  It might be useful to all if it could be programmed to 911.

BAD idea.  Can you imagine having fire, police and EMS dispatched
every time someone knocked a phone off the hook and didn't notice.
That's why all the "I've fallen and can't get up" services have come
into being They determine what kind of, if any, service is required
and notify the proper authorities.  Most emergency service
organizations are already overworked without have many more 911-HANGUP
calls to respond to.


Bryant   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 08:04:56 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Help!!! Broken Hard Drive Shuts Down BBS


 Samuel R. Kaplan <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The good news is that I am able to run Procomm plus off a floppy in
> host mode to tell users that the board is down for a couple of weeks.

> The bad news is that I can read the message on the host computer but
> no one else can.

If your real problem is speed, why not use a RAMDISK? Meanwhile, the
PROCOMM + suite is very versatile and quite reconfigurable if you do
not mind programming (some time ago I wrote a freeware program to
negotiate CALLER-ID with a SUPRA modem -- plug -- that decided whether
to answer the phone and initiate HOST mode entirely in ASP). I would
suggest a similar approach.

As I recall, you can download the entire HOST ASP surce code from the
Datastorm BBS (314.875.0503) if you want to tweak in a delay yourself.

Not sure what kind of floppy you mean but it looks like the essential
PC+ installation would fit on a 1.2 Mb floppy and ASPs do not take up
much space.


Warmly,

Padgett

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 13:58:59 EDT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Unable to Sustain the # Signal


My office has a phone which has buttons useable for touch-tone where
needed.  But a minor inconvenience has come to light: I can't make
"sequence" call on the Orange Card.  Instead, I have to start all over
again in order to make another call.  The problem is that I cannot
keep the "#" signal on long enough to get me back to the "call" tone;
I get a split-second "blip" and then silence when I try to hold down
the #.

------------------------------

Date: 03 Jul 93 00:59:13 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: It Made me Think Differently About Caller-ID


 > Here was an inexpensive device that hooked up to the telephone line,
 > your answering machine, and especially your portable phone, and
 > really solved a problem without a lot of complex user-interface hair.

I've just picked up a device for my Apple PowerBook that does the following:

        - S/R 9600 Baud modem w/ V.32BIS, V.42, MNP2-5 & 10
        - S/R 9600 Baud Fax
        - Answering machine w/ caller ID and forwarding
        - Call manager w/ built-in speaker phone, directory dialing
          local caller id translation, etc.

Its made by a company called Applied Engineering. The device replaces
the fairly useless Apple 2400 modem and has no external parts.

This thing is great for those of us who spend a lot of work nights
stuck in a motel somewhere and need to get paperwork done and/or calls
returned.  I'm so impressed with the unit that I'm going to start
selling them!

This is not a commercial or a review.  I just think that the board is
one hell of a problem solver for anyone who gets stuck on the road.


Brian T. Vita     CSS, Inc.     CI$70702,2233

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 09:15:36 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Shades of the Seldon Patent


re: Digital Signature Scandal (vol 13 issue 438)

Well it sure sounds to me like the "fix is in". For those who do not
realize it, the DSS is an integral part of the CAPSTONE chip and may
be a necessary component of the "auto-ignition" feature in CLIPPER.

This means that every commercial user of Clipper/Capstone (IMHO the
real target audience) will be required to pay tribute to PKP in
exchange for permission to use a government-developed technology.

It is interesting that the government is exempted from paying the
"royalty" but you can bet that if Americans want to communicate with
the gov, they will pay and pay and pay (that $1.00 per certificate per
year following the first three years is the real moneymaker IMHO --
read as per business TELEPHONE per year). The three year wait makes
sure that the technology becomes entrenched.

The list of "requiring" services could be impressive: electronic IRS
filing, Social Security inquiries, FHA/VA inquiries, Medicare/Medicaid
filings, etc, etc. Gore's "Information Superhighway" would be a toll
road.

For some time I have wondered about the wisdom of granting patents to
mathmatical algorithms and software.


Bemusidly,

Padgett

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 09:24:24 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Mark Earle)
Subject: New Phone System in Our Office


Here at my place of employment, we're getting a new phone system.

The current system is a 'Dimension' analog system, uses standard phone
sets like you would find in your residence (except for some isolated
pockets of 1A2 key stuff in some older offices).

The Dimension system is maxed out at around 400 extensions. The campus
expects to serve in coming freshman in '94, and so part of the reason
for expansion was to gain additional capacity.

The new sysetm is a Meridian digital. In the implementation chosen
each phone instrument has an analog port for attachment of modems,
etc; each number comes w/voice mail (transfer on busy/no answer, some
flexibility) and a message waiting "lamp".

Currently, we get no detail on LD calls; essentially, the total LD
bill is divided by the number of phones, and then multiplied by the
number of phones per department. In the new system, each user
authorized to make LD calls will get a 'pin' of some sort (as yet,
I've not seen a spec) and supposedly, the pin will work from anywhere
- it's person-pin, not instrument-specific. This should give us a lot
better handle on our LD costs.

Recursive forwarding is disabled, i.e., only one hop forwarding.

Voice mail notification to a standard display pager _is_ available.
Of course, one could just use a standard line and if the call
consisted of a series of tt digits (the Meridian attempting to deposit
a number on the pager) you'd know voice mail was there for you at
times when off campus.

No mention, yet, of how on campus housing will be handled billed. No
statement/ mention of privacy, monitoring /useage of voice mail, etc.

If anyone has specifics (good or bad) of this phone system let me know
at the email address below. Thanks!


 [e-mail]     Mark Earle
 finger above for pgp key   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Natick 911 Drama
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 12:24 -0400


There was a story in the news here (in Eastern Massachusetts) this
past week about a four year old who saves his mother's life by dialing
911. Nice feature story stuff.

The telecom aspect was that Natick supposedly doesn't have its own 911
so the call got forwarded to nearby Needham (I'm doing this from
memory of radio reports so I might have the towns wrong -- they are
nearby however). What puzzles me is that they claim that they took ten
minutes to locate the household by having the four year old, who
didn't know his own name or address, give them clues by describing the
house and the neighborhood. What puzzles is why they couldn't just use
the phone number appearing on the operator's console to determine the
address?

Is it possible that the information still isn't forwarded? Or is it
just that no one involved thought of it? Either seems unlikely but
those are the only explanations I could think of.

Another side note, Natick is in 508 and Needham is in 617, but they
are adjacent.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 10:35 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Prefixes vs. Geography


Greetings.  Larry Colton mentions an automated system that uses ANI
data to provide information about the "closest" store to a caller.
True, this can be useful in many cases, but the exceptions point up
the need for callers to be able to override that decision in some
cases.

For example, here in rural Topanga, CA (in the Santa Monica Mountains
between the coast and the San Fernando Valley, above the city of
L.A.), we're served by the 310-455 GTD5 exchange.  If you look it up
in the normal tables, you'll find it listed as being a Santa Monica
exchange, and indeed it is in the Santa Monica rate area.  But in
actuality, we're many miles and a good half hour drive (or more) from
Santa Monica and the region surrounding it.  The 455 exchange is
actually a fiber-connected Remote Service Unit of the PacPal (Pacific
Palisades) switch (years ago, of course, it was its own C.O. -- first
SXS, then a DMS-10).

OK, so what happens when you call an automated service from here?  You
get locations for the Santa Monica and West Los Angeles area.  The
phone prefix information doesn't inform anyone that in actuality, the
locations most useful to us would be West San Fernando Valley
locations, which we could reach in a relatively few minutes.  The same
problem comes up with phone books -- we're provided for free with
Santa Monica yellow pages, when the ones you might really want are for
the SF Valley.  The telcos operate strictly by prefix boundaries.

Anyway, the bottom line is that ANI automated location systems can be
very useful, but should always include *some* way for a caller with an
exceptional situation to enter their own data in some form.


  --Lauren--

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Elana Beach)
Subject: How to Destroy a COCOT
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 15:46:35 GMT


[e-mail] (Charles Stephens) writes:

[schtuff sacrificed to the bandwidth gods]

 >to call automated operators or answering machines).  Well then I asked
 >for the check (I wasn't going to let them keep MY $0.25, they didn't
 >make the call), and she said that I was given the option and she
 >wouldn't.  She then impolitely hangs up on me.

 >I call again.  She answers again.  I ask for a supervisor.  She says I am
 >the supervisor (likely), so I ask for anyone higher up.  She then spits
 >off that she was part owner.  I ask to file a complaint, she hangs up.

 >Witch.  I should have stuck gum down the coin slot, that would have
 >taught them.

Hmmmmmm ... I wonder about the inner workings of coin phones ...  If
you were to fabricate a ferrous disk (the exact same size as a
quarter), magnetized it, then dropped in into the next COCOT that
deserved it, what would happen?  Would the "coin" then stick itself to
anything important and gum up the works?  (Not that I'd DO it, of
course! :)

Just curious.  I actually prefer the direct approach posted on this
Digest several months ago, where someone attached the COCOT to his
pickup with a heavy chain and then took it down the highway ...


-Elana "wish I owned a pickup" Beach

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #446
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05259;
          3 Jul 93 21:54 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09474
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 19:43:33 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28969
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Jul 1993 19:43:02 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 19:43:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #447

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Jul 93 19:43:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 447

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: A Short Vacation; Talk Ticket Reports (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: Phone Theft Alarm (Steve Forrette)
    Re: New York Telephone Outage (Carl Oppedahl)
    Phunny Coins For Pay Phones? (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: Time Signals via Modem (Jason Hunsaker)
    Miscellaneous COCOT Questions  (David Ash)
    Re: Using a Cellular on a PC Modem (Jeff Freeman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 18:56:23 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: A Short Vacation; Talk Ticket Reports Wanted


This is the final Digest for the next couple days. I am going to catch
up on some other stuff, and we will probably have a picnic and
fireworks Sunday, and maybe again Monday. You'll see Digests coming
your way again sometime Tuesday.

The Talk Ticket people are asking for feedback from those of you who
have used them over the past couple months. If you could send me your
comments in the next few days, I'll pass them along. On the same topic
I now have Talk Tickets in five and ten dollar denominations in addition
to the two dollar 'samples' originally offered.

Here are the rates:

You can still get a sample two dollar ticket for two dollars.
You can get ten of the two dollar tickets for fifteen dollars.

$5 tickets are $4.50 each.  $10 tickets are $9 each.

The two dollar tickets get you four minutes of calling time; either
four calls of one minute each; one call of four minutes; or two calls
of two minutes each, etc.  On international calls you get about a
minute and a half per card.

The five dollar cards have ten 'units' (minutes). The ten dollar cards
have twenty 'units' (minutes). You can call anywhere in the USA at
one unit per minute. International calls are given less time.

As we discussed before, Talk Tickets, like the Orange Cards, are best
used in situations where you would otherwise pay a surcharge, and when
higher daytime rates apply. You'd use them from payphones or hotel
rooms for the most part.

Really the only difference between Orange Card and Talk Ticket is the
former provides open account credit -- the latter is a 'debit' prepay
card. We pay you 'interest' on your advance payment with the differential
as noted above in the price versus value.

 With Talk Ticket, you:

          Dial the 800 number, and listen for the chime.
          Dial in the serial number on the ticket, listen for voice prompt.
          Dial the desired number.

The voice tells you how much time remains unused on the card.

Talk Tickets can be ordered electronically through your modem and
terminal, using the CHECK FREE method of payment. By using this method
you cut several days off the delivery time of the tickets. To use this
method your email message to me should include:

      EXACT NAME as it appears on checking account to be debited.
      CHECK NUMBER being used as payment.
      THE AMOUNT OF MONEY you authorize to be debited.
      BANK TRANSIT AND ACCOUNT NUMBER ... all the numbers on the
             bottom of the check.
      THE NAME OF THE BANK on which the check is drawn.

Naturally, include the address where you want the tickets sent, and if
you want the serial numbers and a help file advanced to you by email
so you can begin using the tickets right away, include that in your
request.

Send this information to '[e-mail]' ...

If you prefer to order 'the old fashioned way' :)  then your check
or money order should be made payable to:

      TELECOM Digest
      2241 West Howard Street #208
      Chicago, IL  60645

IN addition, you can telephone your CHECK FREE request for Talk Tickets
to 312-465-2700 or fax your request to 312-743-0002.

Have a happy and safe holiday!  See you again Tuesday.


Patrick Townson

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Phone Theft Alarm
Date: 3 Jul 1993 20:09:54 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg) writes:

> Actually, I want to go on record as being appreciative of the
> treatment that I received at the Little America property in Salt Lake
> City.

That sounds like pretty good treatment.  Let me tell you of a story
where I was not so lucky.  A few years ago, some of the Motel 6 ads
specifically mentioned that not only do they offer free local calls
and calling card calls with no surcharge, but that they had phones
with modular jacks in the rooms, so that you could plug in your
computer "and dial in your orders," presumably if you were a
travelling salesman.  Well, the room I got did indeed have modular
connectors on the phone, but all the connectors had the little release
pin clipped off.  I guess they think that someone disposed to steal
the phone is going to be deterred by this.  Since I did not bring any
tools, I had to make do with a key, and it took about five minutes,
and had to be repeated each time I wanted to switch between the room
phone and my modem.

I went to the front desk, and they gave me the strangest look and just
couldn't understand what a computer and the telephone line had to do
with each other.  "I don't know nothin' about the phones" was one
response.  I spoke with the property manager the next day, and told
him how they were specifically mentioning the ability to easily plug
in a computer in their ads, and that I thought this was misleading
advertising.  His response was "Well, we say 'and we'll leave the
lights on,' but the lights aren't always on, are they sir?"  But, in
general, it seems like things have improved greatly over the past five
years or so.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: When the manager made that smart-aleck remark about
the lights 'not always being on' you should have asked if he'd like
someone to turn his lights off for good with a complaint to corporate
and maybe a decision by corporate to find a new franchisee for that
location.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: New York Telephone Outage
Date: 3 Jul 1993 16:54:19 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> Christopher Zguris <0004854540@
mcimail.com> writes:

> In TELECOM DIGEST Volume 13 Issue 437 John Hawkinson ([e-mail])
> writes:

>> According to New York Telephone, there has been a cut trunk (cable) in
>> Mount Vernon, NY, causing a major service disruption. The estimated
>> time for completion of repair is 5:00pm Friday! The disruption has the
>> following effects:

>>*      A large number (all?) of 914 (Westchester, including Yonkers,
>>       White Plains, etc.)  numbers are unreachable from 212 (and
>>       perhaps other places). You get an ``all circuits busy'' message

>>*      A large number (all?) of 212 numbers are unreachable
>>       from most of 914. You just get a fast busy.

> With this cable break in place, what would happen if someone in 914
> tried to call a business in 212 on an 800 number provided by someone
> other than NY Telephone (MCI, SPRINT, ETC.)? Likewise, what would
> happen in the same situation using one of the local 800 numbers NY
> Telephone tries to push on its customers?

I heard that people in 914 who were trying to reach 212 had no trouble
so long as they used a prefix such as 10288, 10222, 10333 ...  which
forced the call, even though intraLATA, onto working long-distance
trunks.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza   New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax [phone]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Phunny Coins For Pay Phones?
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 22:22:56 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Elana
Beach) writes:

> Hmmmmmm ... I wonder about the inner workings of coin phones ...  If
> you were to fabricate a ferrous disk (the exact same size as a
> quarter), magnetized it, then dropped in into the next COCOT that
> deserved it, what would happen?

While I can't answer this question specifically, I can add something.

Here in the northern part of the USA, Canadian pennies, nickels,
dimes, and quarters circulate at par.  This makes sense since they are
about the same value as their US counterparts, and have the exact same
size and shape.  They differ in two respects: Canadian coins are
lighter than US ones, and they are attracted by magnets.

Telcos and other businesses that accept mostly coins (e.g., vending
machine operators) thus have a need to separate the Canadian from the
US coinage, so they can reject the Canadian.  (Think about it: a
Canadian quarter may still be worth 25 cents if you can give it to
someone else, but a hundred Canadian quarters are only worth about $19
in reality.)  The way many machines do this is by installing a magnet
near the coin rejection slot, so that the Canadian coins are attracted
off the normal coin path and rejected.

US residents: Write your congresscritters now and ask them to support
the discontinuation of the penny and dollar bill, to save taxpayers
millions every year ...


Garrett A. Wollman     [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman        UVM disagrees.


[Moderator's Note: For quite a few years, the Chicago Transit Authority
had a lot of trouble with Brazillian centavo (?) coins being passed
off as tokens in subway turnstiles. They were the same size as a token
(maybe 1/64th of an inch smaller) but obviously not worth a ride on
the subway. Coin dealers in Chicago were selling them allegedly for
'costume jewelry' until the CTA put the heat on them to stop the
practice. Back in the days of the old-style payphones with three slots
on the top for 5/10/25 cent coins, someone also reported in an under-
ground newspaper that a number 14 brass washer would work just fine as
long as you put a small amount of scotch tape over the hole in the
center. You can buy those in lots of a hundred for about a dollar. And
does anyone recall the very early dollar bill changers used in places
with lots of vending machines, or at the laundromat?  The change mach-
ines from the early 1960's would take *any* reasonable facsimile of a
dollar bill, provided the paper was cut to the right size.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Jason Hunsaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Time Signals via Modem
Date: 3 Jul 93 17:04:48 MDT
Organization: Utah State University


In article <[e-mail]>,  [e-mail]
(Alfredo Cotroneo) writes:

> I am writing software which would get the (atomic) time signal from
> sources which deliver that via modem. Is there a list of phone numbers
> which offers this service worldwide available, together with the an
> explanation of the time-code string transmitted?  I have developed a
> program which gets the time from the IEN site in Torino, Italy, but
> would like to add the possibility to use other "servers". This
> software works on a PC compatible, and I have plans to release it to
> the public domain, once I can insert more than one server
> compatibility.

National Institute of Standards and Technology
Boulder, Colordo, USA: 303 494 4774

U.S. Naval Observatory
202 653 0351

Or you can FTP a program that already does this, and explains some of
the time strings provided by these places from:

wuarchive.wustl.edu

the file is: /systems/ibmpc/msdos/sysutl/timset60.zip

You will need a copy of PKUNZIP to unzip the file.


Internet: [e-mail] (Jason Hunsaker),  Logan, Utah

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Ash)
Subject: Miscellaneous COCOT Questions
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1993 23:08:01 GMT


Two questions involving COCOTs:

1. There was a post about tone dialers which presumably can be used to
"dial" on a COCOT when the keypad is disabled after completing a call
(useful for voicemail, calling cards, etc.).  Can anyone recommend a
good tone dialer?  Are they available in general electronics stores?

2. If I use a COCOT to place a collect call to Canada, then assuming
the call goes through at all, can I assume the party in Canada will
be charged only the standard rate for a collect call (as opposed to
the exorbitant AOS rate)?  I've always assumed that the AOS would have
no way of charging their high rates for collect calls to Canada because
of the monopoly situation in Canada.  Am I right?


David W. Ash    [e-mail]    HOME: [phone]

------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jeff Freeman)
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1993 19:56:29
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Freeman)
Subject: Re: Using a Cellular on a PC Modem


[e-mail] (Ricardo Cantu) wrote:

> Anyone out there know how I can use a cellular phone to make calls
> on my PC modem?  A friend told me all I needed was to make a straight
> RJ11<=>RJ45 connector and set the cellular to off-hook dialing.  Will
> this work?  Are there any other ways to do this?  Are there any
> products on the market that will provide a solution to this problem?


Konexx makes a acoustic coupler which works with cellular phones<and
digital phones, pay phones, etc>. It will work with most all cellular
phones as comapred to the direct connect units you can purchase. We've
used the Koneex with our cellulars and have sold them to customers who
use them all over the world when ripping the phone jack apart isn't to
be done. Nifty little units actually. On cellular you can get 2400 bps
(9600 bps on a digital hardwire phone). I know of folks using these
units for portable credit card terminals with no problems.


Jeff Freeman           1-800-GO-PORCH Toll-Free
Front Porch Computers  1-706-695-1888 <voice>
Rt 2 Box 2178          1-706-695-1990 <fax>
Chatsworth, GA 30705   75260,21  Compuserve ID #
Internet: [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #447
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19800;
          5 Jul 93 21:17 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08331
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Jul 1993 19:02:14 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29536
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Jul 1993 19:01:42 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 19:01:42 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #448


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Jul 93 19:02:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 448

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year (Fred Morris)
    Re: Phunny Coins For Pay Phones? (Bill Campbell)
    Re: Phunny Coins For Pay Phones? (Joe George)
    Re: GSM Security (Haakon Styri)
    Re: GSM Security (Raj Sanmugam)
    Re: How to Destroy a COCOT (Brian T. Vita)
    Steal This Book (Ken Jongsma)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year
Date: 5 Jul 1993 04:13:51 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> The other thing is, I don't understand how roamer fraud could be a
> problem in LA, since the LA carriers don't allow inward roaming
> without a pre-arranged billing arrangement (usually via credit card).
> Can someone explain this?

> [Moderator's Note: Well, they don't *any longer*.  Fraud problems,
> maybe? They were not always that way, where they?   PAT]

Roaming in LA is definitely a mess.  Let share my experiences I had
last December.  I'm a Cellular One of Seattle customer (actually, I
now also have a US West Cellular account, prompted by my LA trip where
I realized that I can't rely on Cellular One to provide me with
reliable service), and they have a roaming agreement with LA Cellular.
The theory goes that I should just be able to show up in LA and start
placing calls.  Well, I couldn't.  All I got was a fast-busy generated
locally from my cellphone whenever I tried to make a call.  This would
happen whether I tried to make a local, long distance, customer service,
or 911 call.

So, I called LA Cellular customer service from a payphone.  The person
who answered told me that I had to get a "code" from my home cellular
carrier, and "punch it in" before I would be allowed to place any
calls on the LA Cellular system.  I asked if he meant something like
*18 which is used on the B side to invoke Follow Me Roaming, but he
meant something more like a password of some sort.  I told him that I
have roamed extensively, so to speak, and have never heard of such a
code.  He said that they're used "all the time."  I still don't know
what he was talking about, and I'm sure he still doesn't either :-)

So, I called up to Seattle.  It turns out that due to "fraud control"
reasons, my whole prefix had been pulled from roaming availability in
LA.  I spoke with several different people at various carriers over
the next few days trying to get this resolved, so I was able to piece
together what I think is a fairly complete picture of what's going on.
As has been reported here in the past, LA has a huge roaming fraud
problem, thus the roaming is more difficult there than in other areas
(I've never had any problems elsewhere).  What happened in my case is
that Cellular One of Seattle detected that my home prefix, 206-369,
was under attack by phreaks in LA, so they disabled it for LA roaming
(all 10,000 customers on that prefix).

The woman I spoke with in Customer Care told me that this was for "my
own good," as it would prevent me from getting a bill "in the
thousands" for fraudulent roaming charges.  Of course, she failed to
mention that it would be Cellular One, and not me, that would be
responsible for the fraudulent calls, so they were looking after
themselves, with no regard for me or the inconvenience I suffered as a
result, which was four full days with no cellular service, not even
911 for safety (isn't that the whole point of having a cellphone in
the car?)  Gee, perhaps they could disable my account locally to
protect me from a cloned phone in my own service area! :-)

The reason that they had to go to such extremes in pulling the entire
prefix relates to some problems that LA Cellular is having with His
Honor, Judge Greene.  If LA Cellular were part of the NACN that McCaw
cellular is putting together, the problem would be solved, but alas
they are having legal difficulties in joining.  The reason that the
NACN would solve the roaming problem for the most part relates to the
various ways that the cellular companies verify roamers.  There are
three major methods:

1.  NEG list only.  This was used when cellular was just getting
going, as was not very secure.  A national "neg list" of stolen phones
was maintained, with periodic updates sent to every cellular carrier.
They kept this list loaded into their switch, and any cellphone with
an ESN on the list was denied roaming service.  As long as the ESN
wasn't on the list, the area code and prefix that was the roamer's
home cellular number was checked (this is provided by the phone along
with the ESN at call setup time).  If the area code and prefix was a
valid cellular prefix, and if there was a valid roaming agreement
between the host city and the home city, then the call would be
allowed to complete.

This was not very secure, as one didn't even need special equipment to
perpetrate phraud.  All you had to do is change the telephone number
for the phone to a valid cellular area code and prefix in some other
city, and your call would be allowed.  This could go on for some time
before your ESN was blocked, since it took two or three months for
cellular roaming charges to get back to the home subscriber's bill,
and then some more time for the customer to call, have the offending
ESN put on the NEG list, and have the NEG list updates get loaded into
the other switches.  So, you could just go out and buy a new phone
every few months and make all the calls you wanted for free.

2.  This was clearly not acceptable, so they came up with "Second call
cutoff."  Under this method, as long as the call met the checks in
Method 1 above, it would proceed.  But, a query would then be sent to
the home carrier, asking about the validity of the number/ESN pair.
If a negative response came back, then that phone was blocked from
future calls in that city.  So, the most you could do is place one
call, then you were out of business (changing the phone number on the
phone would no longer work, as the ESN was put on the local blocking
list).  This worked fine until the practice of changing the ESN became
popular.  Some models were altered so that they generated a random ESN
for each call.

In this case, even if the phone number programmed was the same, the
ESN would change for each call, so even though the "second call
cutoff" would always engage after each call, that ESN was never
reused, so the phone was never disabled.  Apparently, many switches
were set up so that the blocking was done only based on ESN, so even
if the phone number remained the same, as long as the ESN was changed
each time, the calls wouldn't be blocked.  This is the system that LA
Cellular uses (or at least did last December), and is why other
carriers have to pull entire prefixes from roaming availability in LA.
They detect that people are using that prefix for the above method of
attack, and disable it.  The problem is of course that as a cellular
customer, you can't predict in advance if this will cause you loss of
service, as your prefix could be pulled at any time if a fraud problem
develops.

3.  The best method is "first call cutoff."  This is what the McCaw's
NACN uses, and is probably in use elsewhere.  When this is in place,
the cellular switches are connected to each other via a nationwide SS7
network.  When a roamer places a call, a query is made of the home
switch to check the validity of the number/ESN pair.  Since the query
comes back in a second or so, this does not impact call setup time
that much, but still prevents most fraudulent calls from going
through.  But His Honor reportedly has a problem with LA Cellular
getting involved in any such program.

I understand that the cellular companies have a big problem with
roamer fraud, especially in LA, and that they cannot be expected to
just eat the losses, as we will all end up paying for them in our
rates in the long run.  Having said that, there are several big
problems I have with the way that the LA situation is being handled,
and that I don't see why they can't be handled better:

1.  Why are calls to Customer Service and 911 denied?  Even if all
Customer Service can do is explain the reason for the denial of
service, this would be better than causing the amount of frustration
that the continual fast-busy generates.  Even a recording of some sort
would be better.  Also, the denial of 911 is completely unacceptable.
I would imagine that someone is going to get sued big-time when a
legitimate roamer is denied 911 access in an emergency and experiences
damages.

2.  Why can't an individual subscriber's number/ESN be enabled, once
their validity has been confirmed with Customer Service?  At $1 a
minute, you would think that they would want to encourage legitimate
roamers to use their system as much as possible.

3.  Since you can't 1+ a toll call when roaming in LA even if you are
validated for roaming, it would seem that the only loss the carriers
would incur would be the possible opportunity cost for those cases
where the fraudulent call blocked the call of a legitimate user
because of cell saturation.  But I infer that part of the problem is
that the home system is partially responsible to LA Cellular for
fraudulent calls, so they are eager to disable prefixes at the first
sign of trouble.

4.  Cellular One of Seattle suggested that I call PacTel Cellular (the
B carrier in LA) and sign up for a temporary credit card roaming
account.  They even offered to reimburse me for the $15 setup fee, and
suggested that I could just flip my phone over to B and call *611 to
get this set up.  One problem with this is that I was never told that
it was necessary to have a credit card in order to roam.  And isn't it
ironic that I was told to call *611 and read them my name, home
address and phone number, and credit card information over the air, in
order to get around "fraud control" measures? :-(

I hope that the carriers can get the legal and technical problems
resolved, and get their switches connected in real time, so that one
can roam without major hassles.  Also, losing the attitude that they
are doing *me* a big favor by denying me service would be a good
start.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Judge Greene has done more to wreck the phone service
in the USA than it would be thought possible for any one person. He
has never attempted to hide or disguise his bitterness and hostility
toward AT&T. Apparently now some of the cellular carriers are in for
the benefit of his 'wisdom and judgment'. They know they are not doing
you a 'big favor'; they just hope you are stupid enough to believe it,
as that saves them a lot of arguments, back-talk and potential legal
action from the majority of their customers who don't know better.  PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year
From: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Date: 5 Jul 93 17:05:00 GMT
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)


> In article <[e-mail]>, TELECOM Moderator <telecom@
> eecs.nwu.edu> writes:

>> In a one year period from 1991 through 1992, losses from cellular
>> phone fraud tripled from $100 million to $300 million nationwide
>> according to the Washington DC based Cellular Telecommunications
>> Industry Association.

> I have two comments.

> Whoever designed the AMPS "security" system was an idiot.  It was well
> known in the telephone industry at least as far back as 1978 (see the
> Bell System Technical Journal describing the Unix password system)
> that you don't broadcast passwords in the clear.  That should be
> obvious to anyone, even if you aren't expert in security systems.

> The other thing is, I don't understand how roamer fraud could be a
> problem in LA, since the LA carriers don't allow inward roaming
> without a pre-arranged billing arrangement (usually via credit card).
> Can someone explain this?

> [Moderator's Note: Well, they don't *any longer*.  Fraud problems,
> maybe? They were not always that way, where they?   PAT]

As a new user of cellular communications, I am concerned about this
hole in security (though I don't live in LA thank goodness). Does
anybody know if the ESN is transmitted in the clear using either
digital AMPS or GSM?  This might be a longer term solution to the
problem.

Using current technology, would it be possible for the Cellular
companies to put safeguards in their system which would deactivate a
cellular phone once a monthly bill got beyond a set amount for an
account. If a user really was using more a particular month then he
could call it, present some identification code and have the limit
raised that month.


Laurence Chiu
The Transfer Station BBS [phone] & 837-5591 (V.32bis both lines)
Danville, California, USA. 1.5 GIG Files & FREE public Internet Access

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fred Morris)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Fraud Losses Triple in a Year
Date: 5 Jul 1993 13:18:00 -0700
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


adiron![e-mail] (Tom Olin) writes:

> [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator) wrote:

>> So phreaks, have phun!  Judge Tashima in Los Angeles Federal District
>> Court is on your side.

> Do you say this because you sincerely feel that the judge intention-
> ally made a decision contrary to the law, or are you merely displeased
> with the practical consequences of the decision?

Judges *make* law.  It's the law.

> It is convenient to have judges decide cases based on sentiment, but
> that does not make it right.  There have been many decisions the
> effects of which I dislike but which had to be made based on the
> current law.  And there is also the real possibility that a law may be
> interpreted differently by different people.

What's the point?

> I really doubt that Judge Tashima is in favor of phone fraud.

D'accord!

Maybe what the judge is trying to allocate is the responsibility for
a) bit radiation and b) the content of that radiation.


Fred  Morris   [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Bill Campbell <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA 98040
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1993 03:37:57 GMT


In <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator noted in response
to [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman):

> [Moderator's Note: For quite a few years, the Chicago Transit Authority
> had a lot of trouble with Brazillian centavo (?) coins being passed
> off as tokens in subway turnstiles. They were the same size as a token
> (maybe 1/64th of an inch smaller) but obviously not worth a ride on
> the subway. Coin dealers in Chicago were selling them allegedly for
> 'costume jewelry' until the CTA put the heat on them to stop the

When I went to England in 1972 I came back with a bunch of coins that
were exactly the same dimensions as a U.S. dime (I think it was a
half-penny), and worked a treat in parking meters.  I was real tempted
to go the airport money exchange and buy a bag of the critters.

> practice. Back in the days of the old-style payphones with three slots
> on the top for 5/10/25 cent coins, someone also reported in an under-
> ground newspaper that a number 14 brass washer would work just fine as
> long as you put a small amount of scotch tape over the hole in the
> center. You can buy those in lots of a hundred for about a dollar. And

My father told a story about his fraternity house and their various
methods of diddling the pay phones.  My favorite was making a wax mold
of nickels and freezing up a bunch of ice nickels (they drilled a hole
in the coin box for drainage :-).

> does anyone recall the very early dollar bill changers used in places
> with lots of vending machines, or at the laundromat?  The change mach-
> ines from the early 1960's would take *any* reasonable facsimile of a
> dollar bill, provided the paper was cut to the right size.   PAT]

As opposed to the fare card machines in the D.C. Metro which would
refuse most real bills?


INTERNET:  [e-mail]   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:        uunet!camco!bill   8545 SE 68th Street
FAX:           [phone]   Mercer Island, WA 98040; [phone]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Phunny Coins For Pay Phones?
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 12:39:03 EST
Organization: The Waffle Whiffer, Atlanta, GA


In comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] writes:

> center. You can buy those in lots of a hundred for about a dollar. And
> does anyone recall the very early dollar bill changers used in places
> with lots of vending machines, or at the laundromat?  The change mach-
> ines from the early 1960's would take *any* reasonable facsimile of a
> dollar bill, provided the paper was cut to the right size.   PAT]

I recall a number of bill changers that would simply take a blank
piece of paper (it had to be a good stock to get the thickness) cut to
the right size.  Later, the same bill changers (upgraded I guess)
needed a "1" in a corner (the corner varied) but photocopies of a 1
dollar bill (front side only) were sufficient.


Joe George ([e-mail], emory!indigo!whiffer!jgeorge)
Actually, I _do_ speak for The Waffle Whiffer


[Moderator's Note: Then for awhile, the change machines depended on
seeing a picture of George Washington (photocopied or whatever) in the
proper place on the sheet of paper. Now they have the bugs mostly out
of the dollar bill changers; they even feel for the thread in the
paper and check all sorts of (essentially unduplicatable on copy
machines) things. Very curious thing about the law also in the early
days of dollar bill changers: As long as the phrase 'VOID-NOT
NEGOTIABLE' was written on the slip of paper (that the machine
otherwise accepted) the person passing it was not guilty of counter-
feiting -- a federal offense -- and a more serious matter than
simple fraud, a local or state crime. Counterfeiting requires a claim
by the person making the reproduction that his scrip is the currency
of the United States. A printed repudiation on the scrip is all that
is required; note the newspaper advertising coupons which include
'savings dollars' and the like; any 'too close to the real thing'
always have a disclaimer printed on them.

One of the techniques from the 'Yippie' era was to take *real* money
being used in change machines or subway turnstiles and stamp it with a
big notation across the front saying 'Certified Counterfeit. Non-Negotiable'
prior to use. The person passing it would get what he paid for, but
the vending machine companies and transit authority had a devil of a
time getting *their* banks to take it. Real money marked counterfeit;
counterfeit money passed as the real thing ... many vending machine
companies from the 1960's went bankrupt after installing dollar bill
changers.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (YuNoHoo)
Subject: Re: GSM Security
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Norwegian Telecom Research
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 18:52:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Evangelos
Kontogiannis) writes:

> What I would like to ask our (European) readers is, given the digital
> encryption in GSM, are fraud schemes of the type often mentioned in
> this list (see #435) possible?

There are basically two types of encryption used in the GSM system.
One of them is user authentication, and it is performed by the a smart
card named the SIM (Subscriber Information Module). The algorithm used
in this card is known only to the network operator who provided the
card (and the people it trusts). The authentication protocal is
standard: a challenge/respose exchange. Different operators may,
however, use different algorithms.

The answer to your question is: It depends on the operator you'll
be using.


Haakon Styri    <[e-mail]>      ***  std. disclaimer applies  ***

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Raj Sanmugam)
Subject: Re: GSM Security
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ericsson Communication Inc.
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 18:09:16 GMT


Vangelis Kontogiannis writes:

What I would like to ask our (European) readers is, given the digital
encryption in GSM, are fraud schemes of the type often mentioned in
this list (see #435) possible? Any data on the subject?  Remember, in
GSM subscription data is recorded in a credit-card sized SIM
(Subscriber Information Module) that plugs into the GSM phone; the
subscriber is uniquely identified by his IMSI (International Mobile
Subscriber Identity).

I have a general comment ...

The governments consider the security measures in the GSM system as
"Too secure".  I am not familiar with the #435 comments. But, I think
the GSM security measures should make it much more difficult, if not
impossible, to penetrate the system.

------------------------------

Date: 05 Jul 93 08:08:56 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How to Destroy a COCOT


> I wonder about the inner workings of coin phones ...  If you were to
> fabricate a ferrous disk (the exact same size as a quarter), magnetized it,
> then dropped in into the next COCOT that deserved it, what would happen?

Personally I find a good shot of Krazy Glue in the coin slot gives me
the desired effect.


Brian Vita    CSS, Inc.       CI$70702,2233

Disclaimer:  This is not an incitement to vandalize a COCOT.  One is always
responsible for their own actions and judgments. Of course, if the bastard
really deserves it ...


[Moderator's Note: One of the COCOT companies here reported in the
paper several days ago that they were being 'terrorized' by someone
who was calling their answering machine and leaving 'lewd and very
nasty comments about their (the company's) phones' ... and threatening
to vandalize the phones beyond further use, etc.  I'd think one very
simple reason a COCOT company would want to maintain customer goodwill
is the high cost of installing and maintaining the phone. I've thought
about going into the business, but those phones are hundreds of dollars
each!  Install one and have it stolen or broken the next day ?? I'd
rather give cheap, reliable service; but I guess even then some people
would ruin the phone or steal it. Maybe the COCOTS charge as much as
they do because of the costs involved.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 05 Jul 93 11:15:24 EDT
From: Ken Jongsma <[e-mail]>
Subject: Steal This Book


Ah yes, the old #14 brass washer with scotch tape acress the hole.
This and many other creative anarchy suggestions were immortalized in
"Steal This Book" by the late Abby Hoffman of Worcester, MA. I wish I
still had my copy, but someone stole it.

Among the things I can remember:

  - Flush for Nixon. Suggestions for organizing a campaign to show
    support for the president and the Vietnam war. Designed to show
    up on either the water pressure meters or sewerage flow meters,
    I was never quite sure.

  - The #14 brass washer thing was primarily aimed at parking meters
    and telephones. Abby suggested keeping a box of them in your car.

Obligatory telephonic reference:

  - A rather stupid and dangerous suggestion to cut the female
    end of an extension cord off and attach the wires to a nearby
    telephone network interface box. Abby claimed it would burn out
    the wires all the way back to the central office.

Last I heard, Abby's brother was attempting to sell copies of the book
mail order, but this was many years ago.


Ken


[Moderator's Note: At the time the book was printed, book sellers were
afraid to handle it because of the title which they felt encouraged
people to just walk out with it. The book also made such suggestions
as these:

1) Rent a safety deposit box at a bank under a phalse name. Put a
fish or other dead animals in the box. Walk out; never come back. Let
the stench eventually get so bad the bank has to drill the lock on the
box open.

2) Tamper with the drinking water by putting LSD in the pumps at the
water works. Cause everyone in town to get high.

3) Use very low-powered radio transmitters tunable to various popular
frequencies to inject 'news bulletins' on the car radios of other
drivers as you were driving down the street. Suggested annoucements
included 'President Johnson has just declared an end to the war in
Vietnam and announced our surrender to the North Vietnam goverment.'
Or, 'President Johnson has just announced the sale of marijuana has
been legalized.'

Our younger readers missed out on a fascinating, but very twisted
character in American history.   PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #448
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20136;
          5 Jul 93 21:43 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25330
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Jul 1993 19:33:12 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14571
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Jul 1993 19:32:30 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 19:32:30 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #449


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Jul 93 19:32:00 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 449

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Future of ISDN (William H. Sohl)
    Re: Future of ISDN (Fred Morris)
    Re: Time Signals via Modem (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: Time Signals via Modem (Denis McKeon)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (John R. Levine)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (Arman Dolikian)
    Re: Dialing "1" First (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Caller ID via 800 Number (Pat Turner)
    Re: Caller ID via 800 Number (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: New York Telephone Outage (John Hawkinson)
    Re: New York Telephone Outage (Christopher Zguris)
    Re: Tropez 900MHz Digital Cordless Phone (Mark Bergman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 15:52:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Alan Boritz <72446.461@Compu
Serve.COM> writes:

> Most, that is, who are used to 1200 or 2400 baud.  The rest would only
> "see" the difference in statistics generated during connections.

> But data is not everyone's home activity.  The bulk of home telephone
> use over ISDN would merely serve as a vehicle to charge for services
> not charged for before.

Please provide some examples of what services you get at no cost today
that you claim will be billed for when using ISDN.

>> Anyway, I'm obviously biased towards ISDN ... (deleted for brevity)

> But let's not forget that that "significant change" is one for the
> worse.  Fiber can be considered to deliver a significantly *inferior*
> grade of service than copper, and as such should be accompanied by a
> *DECREASE* in rates.

In what way are you claiming fiber is inferior to copper?  Please be
specific.

> How come no one at Bellcore, or the BOC's, want to address THAT
> issue?

I'm sure I and others will be happy to if you provide specifics, not
vague generalities.


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fred Morris)
Subject: Re: Future of ISDN
Date: 5 Jul 1993 13:34:32 -0700
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


There is a thread going which seems to be concerned with the ability
to scream at the rest of the world and lost loved ones in case of
disaster.

In the US, CB is this all of the time; buy a CB radio for emergency
use; don't expect anything better than Usenet and you'll be ok.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: Time Signals via Modem
Date: 5 Jul 1993 11:03:11 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
writes:

> Alfredo Cotroneo ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> I am writing software which would get the (atomic) time signal from
>> sources which deliver that via modem. Is there a list of phone numbers

> For US residents you can get a piece of software ($39.00) from
> the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that will
> run on a IBM style PC with a modem.  It calls a number, exchanges data
> for a minute or so, and then sets the clock on your PC to an accuracy
> of a couple thousandths of a second (more accurate than your PC can
> measure without special gear). This is intended for scientific
> applications, but a guy I know got it for a school project is how I
> know about it.  I think you have to tell the program the lat/long of
> where you are so it can give you true local time, not just time zone
> time.

Actually, it works (or at least the one I tried did) on a very simple
kluge.  The problem, of course, is that while the atomic clock is
-very- accurate, there is no way of knowing how long it takes for the
signal to get to your system.

You can -guess- based on phone line distance, but there are so many
factors involved (what route was taken, what's the built in delay from
signal processing ... or, to paraphrase Admiral Harper: "How many
nanoseconds are there between your system and Fort Collins?") that you
really are just making a guess.

So, the program ingeniusly is designed to have your pc send a ping to
the clock, and measure the 'pong' time. a few zip-zips later, you've
got a good idea of the delay (not perfect, but as good as you can hope
for).

BTW, the program I used was shareware, so there should be versions of
it floating around.


[e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Denis McKeon)
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 13:05:08 MDT
Organization: Connemara - Computing for People
Subject: Re: Time Signals via Modem


In article <[e-mail]> Jason Hunsaker <[e-mail].
EDU> writes:

> Or you can FTP a program that already does this, and explains some of
> the time strings provided by these places from:

> wuarchive.wustl.edu

> the file is: /systems/ibmpc/msdos/sysutl/timset60.zip

If your DOS machine's clock(s) are steadily fast or slow also check
out the program "rightime", in ritm11.zip

You can use timeset (occasionally) to set your system clock to the
limits of system (and phone line) accuracy, and use rightime to make
more frequent automatic adjustments to the clock(s), based on the
accurate settings from timeset, and with less frequent need for phone
calls (after an initial flurry to see that everything works well -
after say, 10-20 calls in the first month, you could settle down to
1-2 calls per month.)

A careful reading of the documentation for these two programs will
provide an interesting introduction to time-keeping and accuracy
issues, although not in an "easy reading" manner. :-)


Denis McKeon   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 11:24 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Organization: I.E.C.C.


> In the 404 and 706 area codes (North Georgia), all the toll calls
> require no only the "1", but the area code, even if it the same as
> your own.  Southern Bell claims this is due to the overloaded switches
> they have (since 404 has one of the country's largest LATAs, there are
> a lot of calls SB has to handle in a day I presume). ...

It's not overloaded switches, it's that they were running out of phone
numbers. To tell a number like 802-5556 from 802-555-6789, there are
two dialing plans in use in North America.  In one plan, all calls
within your area code are dialed with seven digits, whether they are
local or toll.  In the other, all toll calls are dialed with eleven
digits, even within your area code.

Whether 1 means "toll" or 1 means "area code follows" seems to be a
largely theological issue.  In a few areas, maybe including North
Georgia, there are probably still old SxS exchanges that can't route
toll calls without the leading 1, so they have to use the 1 for toll
scheme.

Personally, I find "1 for toll" to be a pain in the neck.  Here in
Eastern Mass. the 617 area code is small enough that nearly all 617
numbers are local to each other, with only a few prefixes that need
the leading 1, so you always forget the leading 1 on those numbers.
Furthermore, toll calls get night and weekend discounts, but local
measured calls don't, so at night rates "local" calls to places ten
miles away cost considerably more than "toll" calls to places fifty
miles away.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Arman Dolikian)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First
Organization: Motorola
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 11:03:55 GMT


> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter Alan
> Dutton) writes:

>> Now if the phone company knows that it's a number that they
>> want me to dial a "1" first for, then why can't they just connect me
>> in the first place?

>> Similarly, if I don't realize that a phone number I am calling is in
>> Worcester, and I dial a "1" first because I think I'm being clever by
>> trying to avoid the recorded message, they tell me that I have to call
>> the number again, and this time without the "1". Again, I ask, if they
>> know I don't have to dial the "1", then why don't they know enough to
>> connect me?

Complaint number two has merit and is definitely a problem for those
who travel.

Abbreviating the phone number (last seven digits for local, last five
digits for inside PBX, etc., etc ... is a convenience, and unpredictable
behavior is possible (as eloquently pointed out by others) since there
doesn't appear to be a unified specification for phone companies, PBXs,
etc.

HOWEVER, MY PET PEEVE is that, when I dial using the "fully specified"
string of digits, there is NO ambiguity, and therefore, the system
should not reject "extra" information.

For example, if the called number is  1 [phone]:
        (remember, the "1" is the country code for USA)

I should be able to go to any phone, get an "outside line" dial tone,
and type 17085551234 without further harrassment.  Now, in real life,
it doesn't work this way.  If I happen to be in the same area code as
the called number the system slaps my wrist, complaining that I "over-
specified" the number.  Similarly, if I am inside a Centrex PBX, where
dialing the last five digits of the number is sufficient, I shouldn't
be dinged for entering the full number.

WHY AM I PEEVED?   (Glad you asked).....  ;-)
Those of us who have electronic rolodexes, with auto-dialers, AND are
mobile, have no way of storing a "full" phone number, and expect to
get through, regardless of where we call from.

I KNOW I am entering more than the minimum necessary digits, but I
shouldn't be penalized by having the listen to a recording, and
re-dial (omitting the extra digits).  The same rolodex would have to
have several entries, just to accomodate the variations needed as one
moves from environment to environment.  In this case, ALWAYS typing
the full set of digits is more effective and DESIREABLE!!

Is it too much to ask that a PBX remap 1 [phone] to the short-
hand form of 5-1234 and not stop my call?

Is it too much for a local carrier to map 1 [phone] to 555-1234
(or 1 - 555-1234 or whatever) when that is what is indicated?

This is like having the Post Office REJECT my mail, if I put TOO MUCH
information on the letter, such as adding "USA" on a letter sent
inside the USA!


Arman Dolikian                          |Internet: [e-mail]
Motorola LMPS Software Technology Center|   X.400: [e-mail]
1301 E. Algonquin Road - IL02 Rm 2240   |   Voice: [phone]
Schaumburg, IL 60196  USA               |     Fax: [phone]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 02:22:32 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Dialing "1" First


Regarding the discussion of the few benighted areas where "1" is still
not allowed before area codes when dialing LD numbers ...

Does anyone have an exhaustive list of all the locations in the NANP
that have this restriction, and when they plan on changing over to
allow eleven-digit dialing?  Are there any telcos that aren't on track
to handle NXX area codes when they arrive in 18 months?


Bob Goudreau        Data General Corporation
[e-mail]    62 Alexander Drive
[phone]        Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 13:57 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller ID via 800 Number


Pat writes:

> I think call forwarding a phone to an 800 number -- if that is
possible, some telcos may have it blocked as a legitimate call
forwarding number -- would produce for ANI purposes only the number
doing the forwarding.  I am not sure. What you are ...

You're right.  The ANI would use the forwarding number, as they will
be charged for the call.  Otherwise you could call forward your number
to an 900 IP, advertise "Free Aural Sex", and rake in the bucks.

The ANI, of course, doesn't depend on SS7, and is probally still
passed more commonly as MF.  ANI is passed for most calls (some FGB
calls excepted).  I really can't see any reason CLID couldn't be
passed through to an IXC when CF is used. If the IXC translated the
calls to a POTS number, and maintained SS7 connectivity, then the CLID
could be delivered.  Of course, if an IXC has SS7 connections in both
LATAs, you could call forward to a CLID subscriber in the terminating
LATA.  Pat, you have CLID, maybe you could sell this service :-).
Forward all harassing phone calls to Pat (no cost to him, save the
CLID and monthly costs) and for $5 plus $.50/call he will give you the
number of the caller.  Just make sure your PIC is the one with the SS7
connections.

On the "Doctor calling from home-CLID gives out his home number"
argument: When I was home (Alexander City, AL) last weekend, I looked
in the phone book: We have 15 doctors in town, all 15 list their home
phone numbers.  Of the ones I know have cabins on Lake Martin, all of
them listed a "cabin" number.  Guess things are a little slower (or
people are more responsable) down here.


Patton Turner  KB4GRZ  FAA Telecommunications  [e-mail]

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Caller ID via 800 Number
From: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Date: 5 Jul 93 17:05:00 GMT
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: uttsbbs![e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)


> I called one recently, I can't recall for sure but I think it was
> Target, fully expecting to enter my ZIP code.  Instead I was
> immediately greeted with the information about the store the computer
> felt was closest to me.

> There are obvious advantages and disadvantages to this scheme.  You
> don't need a touchtone pad to get the information, but you better be
> calling from or near home.

Isn't that what Pacbell is advertising now? You call up a roadside
service company via a 800 number and the call is routed to the nearest
garage to your location.

As an aside I recall reading once about a Pizza chain which was using
the same number in all cities it operated in. You called this number
and the call would be routed to the nearest location to you for
delivery. Does anybody recall what chain this was and is this in
operation?


Laurence Chiu              [e-mail]
The Transfer Station BBS [phone] & 837-5591 (V.32bis both lines)
Danville, California, USA. 1.5 GIG Files & FREE public Internet Access


[Moderator's Note: I think it is Dominoes, and yes they are still in
business. They use a '950' style number I think.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Hawkinson)
Subject: Re: New York Telephone Outage
Date: 5 Jul 1993 12:18:13 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John Hawkinson)
writes:

> Hmm ... while I don't know about your specific question, I have a
> personal 800 from Sprint which connects to my 914 number. At the
> beginng of the outage, I tried to call it from 212, and got the same
> response as calling my 914 number via NYT (i.e. all circuits busy).

> I didn't actually try making the call using Sprint (I used AT&T), but
> I do wonder if they would have successfully carried the call.

> [Moderator's Note: First of all, you get no choice whatsoever in how
> your calls to an 800 number are routed. They go from your telco to the
> carrier which handles that particular 800 number. Stuff like 10xxx has
> no bearing or influence whatsoever on calling 800-xxx. It is the carrier
> of record for the number which gets the call. If the 800 number is ser-
> vice by Sprint, then Sprint gets the call; if by AT&T, then AT&T gets
> the call.

I believe I was a little ambiguous above. On this intra-lata call,

    New York Telephone        failed due to disruption
    Sprint 800 number          "     "   "     "
    AT&T                successful

So my question is whether if I'd dialed 10333- first, instead of the
10288- I dialed to get AT&T, would Sprint have successfully completed
the call. I would think so, since they should, like AT&T, have
seperate circuitry between 212 and 914, but then again, the sprint 800
number (which maps to the number I was calling) failed.  So is that
number carried by NYT within the LATA or something?


John Hawkinson    [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 02:23 GMT
From: Christopher Zguris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New York Telephone Outage


Previously I wrote:

> With this cable break in place, what would happen if someone in 914
> tried to call a business in 212 on an 800 number provided by someone
> other than NY Telephone (MCI, SPRINT, ETC.)? Likewise, what would
> happen in the same situation using one of the local 800 numbers NY
> Telephone tries to push on its customers?

And our much-better-informed-than-IO Moderator responded:

> [Moderator's Note: I suppose if the wires handling the call went
> through that cable the call would not go through. 800 numbers are
> nothing special ... they travel over a wire pair also.   PAT]

My original question was not clear. The original message about the
outage said a trunk cable that connects 212 and 914 (and other area
codes) was severed/broken whatever. What I want to know is when
someone in 914 calls my MCI 800 number in 212, does their call leave
the 914 telco switching equipment, connect to MCI, then move through
MCI to the 212 switching equipment? If this is the case, then the
broken cable would be completly bypassed since it goes out from 914
into MCI then back through MCI into 212.  I guess my question is where
and when does a call leave the local carrier?  Even though NY
Telephone serves both 212 and 914, MCI serves my 800 number, so MCI's
lines should be carrying the call, or does MCI use NY Telephone trunk
cables like the one that was severed?


Christopher Zguris    [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Bergman)
Subject: Re: Tropez 900MHz Digital Cordless Phone
Date: 5 Jul 1993 17:26:17 -0400
Organization: Panix Public Access Internet & Unix, NYC


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Darren Alex
Griffiths) writes:

> In comp.dcom.telecom [e-mail] writes:

>> Both the handset and the base can independently be programmed to have
>> one of four possible rings.

> Hmm, how does this affect distinctive ringing?  I'm looking at
> purchasing a 900MHz phone, but I use distinctive ringing features a
> lot and would not be interested if they disappear with a cordless
> phone.

I don't have and have never heard distinctive ring service, but I do
have a Tropez 900DX phone. The different rings are variations on a
single "warble". The four choices play the same warble at different
frequencies -- for the same number of cycles. Thus, each ring is a
different duration and frequency, and to the ear, apparently a
different volume. The ring choices are each uniform -- no "dot-dash"
style. The choice affects the tone (frequency, duration, and volume),
not the pattern of tones that makes up a ring. More confusing, no?
Graphically:


Ring 1    =====_____=====_____=====_____=====_____
Ring 2    ====_____====_____====_____====_____
Ring 3    ===_____===_____===_____===_____
Ring 4    ==_____==_____==_____==_____

    ====    Tone "on" (noise)
    ____    Tone "off" (silence)

>> I haven't had a chance to conduct a good range test yet, though I've
>> heard that it's markedly better than any of the standard 46/49Mhz
>> phones.

> If you have time I'd be very interested to hear the results of a range
> test, also if other folk have 900MHz phones maybe they could drop a
> line to the Digest or me with their range experiences.  Does anyone
> know what the range is supposed to be?  I've had sales people tell me
> everything under the sun, including one at Whole Earth Access who
> claimed it could go up to one mile; is that really true?

Claimed range is one mile. In my case, the base unit is located in a
ground floor interior room of a concrete building with aluminum-studded
sheetrock walls. The base is ~20' from the nearest window. Within the
building, the phone is usable up to two flights _down_, with three
metal doors in the way, and the phone just barely goes out of range at
the roof -- six flights up.

On the street (NYC, overhead power lines), the phone is usable ~4 1/2
city blocks away.

As long as the phone is in range (and the remote unit beeps as it goes
out of range, so the demarcation is clear), the quality is excellent.

Complaints:

The feel of the keypad is poor. I don't get a high number of mis-hits,
but the keypad doesn't feel good.

The phone dials "slowly" -- the redial and memory dial features do not
add any sort of speed dialing.

Sometimes the other party sounds slighty muffled, and the volume must
be adjusted. I've never had the other party complain (or usually even
notice) that I'm on a cordless phone.


Mark Bergman  Biker, IATSE #1 Stagehand, (former) Unix user support grunt
718-855-9148  [e-mail]   {cmcl2,uunet}!panix!bergman


[Moderator's Note: Do you ever find that when you are in the outer
range of where this phone will reach that there is a discrepancy
bewteen the base and the handset where the base can call the handset
but the handset cannot get back to the base?  On a cordless phone of
mine a few years ago, if the battery was not super charged in the
handset I would get some distance away and it would 'ring' for an
incoming call ... but going off hook would not stop the signalling
because so far as the base was concerned I had not answered since it
could not see my signal anywhere. It could hear the base okay though,
but not the other way around.  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #449
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20701;
          5 Jul 93 22:22 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20384
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Jul 1993 20:04:14 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24525
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Jul 1993 20:03:39 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 20:03:39 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #450


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Jul 93 20:03:30 CDT    Volume 13 : Issue 450

Inside This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Net Safari '93 (Ken Kopin)
    Re: New West Pacific Cable; Other Singapore Telecom News (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Which Wires Are Which in a Six-Pair? (Robert B. Thompson)
    Re: Natwick 911 Drama (Luca Parisi)
    Re: Value Added Voice Services (Brian T. Vita)
    Re: Cellular to RS232 interfacing (Joe Harrison)
    Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on Collect Call (John Levine)
    Re: Using a Cellular on a PC Modem (Gary Merinstein)
    Re: 127 Years Ago (Fred Morris)
    Re: Only in Texas (Randal L. Schwartz)
    Re: Data/Fax/Voice on Same Line (Joe Markovic)
    Re: Gnocchi al Telefono (Paolo Bellutta)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ken Kopin)
Subject: Re: Net Safari '93
Date: 5 Jul 1993 21:32:22 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ken Kopin)


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Paul Houle) says:

> Hello, some friends and I are looking into the idea of
> spending next spring break driving a van around cross country to visit
> sites of interest on the internet and USEnet.  One of the wilder
> proposals we have is to try to obtain corporate sponsorships to make
> promotional videos and other materials in connection with this trip;
> in that case, we'd be interested in obtaining some kind of mobile
> internet connection.  Since there are quite a few companies out there
> that could really benefit from turning people on to the internet, we
> think this might work.

> Anyway, we are at a feasability study stage on this, and I'd
> like to invite any comments [by email] from anyone out there who might
> have something to offer.  I'm primarily interested in

>1)      What are the neat places to visit?

How about one of the Coke Machines hooked to the internet? :-)

>2)      Who might be interested in sponsoring such a trip for
>        promotional value,  and how can I contact them?

Sounds like something The Beatles might be interested in!  Or possibly
The Merry Pranksters. (Am I old? :-)

>3)      What kind of equipment and services could best be used to
>        keep a van in USENET and/or Internet contact?  UUCP from pay
>        phones?  Satellites?  A cellular phone SLIP line?

Don't know about this one, but since we're dreaming, maybe you could
get one of those Satellite tracking systems too.  Say! I remember now.
There's some guy riding a souped up bicycle around the country. Same
kinda layout as you are trying for. (I believe his bike/project is
called Behemouth (SP!) or some such) He was on Donahew (SP!)  around
8-10 months ago (So, I can't spell. It wasn't on the requirement list
for net-access 8-).


*** I Buy KOOL-AID Points ***  Internet: [e-mail]
   1-499    1/3 cent each.     Bitnet: AA377%Cleveland.Freenet.edu
   500-1499 1/2 cent each.
   1500-?    1 cent each.      Disclaimer: I didn't do it.

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: New West Pacific Cable; Other Singapore Telecom News
Date: 5 Jul 1993 02:51:20 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wm
Randolph Franklin) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: You *can* have authorization code required to
> complete long distance dialing in the USA. The 1+ service I offer as a
> product for readers here has authorization codes as an optional item
> at no extra charge.

But this service is totally useless in providing any real security
unless there is blocking of 10XXX dialing.  Since no telco that I know
of currently offers this service, any security measures that an IXC
offers for 1+ doesn't provide any real security at all.  And if you
have CPE that implements 10XXX restrictions, it could just as easily
do the international password security as well.  So, we are indeed in
the position where the telcos in the US don't provide real security
for toll calls.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: Robert B. Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Which Wires Are Which in a Six-Pair?
Date: 5 Jul 93 12:27:46 EST
Organization: Forsyth County, Winston-Salem  NC


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
writes:

>     I've been unable to find this information anywhere else.
> I have to install six phone lines (to support a BBS) in my new apartment this
> weekend.  I need to know what colors of a six-pair cable are which (i.e.,
> green is pair one, red is pair two, etc.).

>     I talked with PacBell service about it, and they claimed that
> there wasn't any documentation on how the wiring should be.  The tech
> did try to recall some of the colored pairs off the top of her head,
> but it wasn't much of a help.

You'll probably have standard 25-pair color coding, which uses five
primary colors and five secondary colors to differentiate the 25
pairs. The secondary colors are blue, orange, green, brown and slate
(gray). The first primary is white. Thus, pair one will be white/blue,
pair two will be white/orange, pair three will be white/green, pair
four will be white/brown and pair five will be white/slate. The second
primary is red. Thus, your pair six will be red/blue.

The first wire in each pair is the one that is mostly the primary
color.  That is, using pair one as an example, the white wire with the
blue stripe is the first wire of the pair (tip) and the blue wire with
the white stripe is the second wire of the pair (ring).

If you're connecting these to standard modular jacks, one pair per
jack, connect tip to the green wire in the jack and ring to the red
wire. If for some reason you're jacking two lines per jack, connect
tip of the second pair to the black wire in the jack and ring to the
yellow wire.

It is also allowable in small multi-pair tightly twisted cables to use
pure colors -- that is, pair one will be pure white with pure blue, pair
two will be pure white with pure orange, etc. The theory is that it
will be obvious which white goes with each colored wire because of the
small number of pairs and the tight twist, although it doesn't always
work out that way in a dark equipment room.

There are numerous other color coding arrangements in use. My AT&T
Electronic Wire and Cable catalog lists about twelve of them, but the
above are the most likely. If you run into a strange one, the easiest
thing to do is to write down the colors you have, call your local
Anixter or Graybar and throw yourself on their mercy. Good luck.


Robert Bruce Thompson                [e-mail]
Forsyth County MIS Department        [phone] x3012
Winston-Salem, North Carolina USA    [phone] (FAX)

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Natwick 911 Drama
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 14:06:19 GMT
From: Luca Parisi <ax433![e-mail]>


In TELECOM 13.446, <[e-mail]> wrote:

> There was a story in the news here (in Eastern Massachusetts) this
> past week about a four year old who saves his mother's life by
> dialing 911. Nice feature story stuff.

France 2 (French television) featured a similar story in the News this
week. It involved a five-years old whose mother fainted away and fell
on the floor. Little boy picked up the phone, dialed the local Medical
Assistance (SAMU) -- the number was printed on the phone itself -- and
told the operator: "Mummy has fallen!"

Well, here the story goes differently from the US one ...

The operator's answer was (more or less) "Don't play with your phone!"
Puzzled, our little hero hung up and dialed SAMU again.  This time,
the operator was more straightforward: "Don't play with your phone or
we'll call the Police!" (might have been useful, indeed ..:( ) The
story had an happy end because the next call the boy did was to his
grandparents. Since they live in another city, they called THEIR
local fire brigade and had them handle the thing back.

Interviewed, a SAMU Officer claimed that they receive dozens of calls
each day from little boys playing around with emergency services just
to see what happens.

As a sidenote, it appeared that while the fire brigade has a Caller-ID
facility of some sort on their switchboard, medical assistance has no
means to identify the calling party yet.

This is accurate with my memory, corrections and additions welcome.


Luca Parisi  <[e-mail]>


[Moderator's Note: Here in Chicago, if that dispatcher had been
employed by Chicago Emergency -- our 911 service which handles police,
fire and paramedic calls -- the dispatcher would have been suspended on
the spot and put in line for disciplinary proceedings and possible dis-
charge from employment. This is considered an extremely sensitive area
of employment. Yes, they get a large number of calls which rightfully
should not go to 911 (we here believe 911 should be used *only* in
instances of dire emergency -- when intervention by authorities is
required immediatly); and some are downright fraud calls designed to
cause confusion and disruption. None the less, all receive responses.
Callers giving false alarms are dealt with accordingly (they are usu-
ally written off as 'mistaken citizen attempting to help' unless the
citizen is obviously doing it on purpose), but we do not ignore cries
of help from children on the premise that some children were never
taught or choose to ignore the rule that one does not play pranks on
emergency services.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: 05 Jul 93 08:09:01 EDT
From: Brian T. Vita <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Value Added Voice Services


>> 2. When making calls from some hotel rooms, all the numbers dialed are
>> intercepted, printed out, and used by hotel staff when calculating
>> your bill. When you dial the card-calling service, your ID (or
>> card-number) AND your secret number, is also printed out.

> Actually, it isn't.  The hotel switch receives only the tones used to
> reach the card service provider.  It then cuts through the voice path,
> and the remaining tones are sent directly to the card service provider.

Actually, most of the systems that I've worked with trap all DTMF
tones in the SMDR printout.  When I was at Comdial school several
years ago they taught us their two (then current) HOMO (hotel/motel)
systems.  Both systems caught all DTMF tones.  Other systems likely do
the same.

All of the office key systems that I now work with trap ALL tones that
are generated by the keyset (some will even catch those from a
handheld box). Not only would an unscrupulous operator have your
calling card number but also your voice mail codes, etc.


Brian Vita    CSS, Inc.  CI$70702,2233

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 17:45:04 +0100
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular to RS232 Interfacing


[previous stuff, info wanted on cellular/computer interface, deleted]

Dr D J Harvey <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Having looked into this myself recently I find an NEC model, available
> as either car mounted or hand-portable for which an interface for
> external devices could be fitted. Of course, the model sold here has a
> UK style jack-socket, but given that its an expansion module rather
> than in-built, I presume that thiss is modified to local needs.  Check
> with an NEC dealer.

If anyone is actually thinking of doing this, forget it. I tried very
hard to get *any* info about interfacing the NEC P3 handportable
phone.  After getting bounced between NEC(UK) and its dealers several
times I finally got told by NEC that there is *no way* to connect this
phone (or the later P4) to any modem unless I buy their $$$ car kit
(very useful in trains, hotel rooms, etc).

And no they would not give me any info on the pinouts on the jack
socket fitted to the bottom of the phone. "And even if we did sir it
would be of no use to you as we won't sell you the proprietary
connector that fits the socket". In fairness to NEC they did tell me
the connector was available in Japan if I should feel like a short
holiday. Sorry no mail order.

Basically NEC do not want you to do anything, learn anything about
their phones. The UK has ESN cloners too so I can sort of see their
point, however penalizing legit users ain't right in my book.

I've been looking round for a new phone and it looks to me like the
easiest one to interface to a modem has *got* to be the Nokia 101 if
anyone else is trying this.


Joe Harrison     Phone: [phone]     | ICL Ltd. Bracknell
S=Harrison/I=J/O=icl/P=icl/A=gold 400/C=GB | Berkshire RG12 1BD
[e-mail]          | United Kingdom
       Disclaimer, my opinions not my employers, etc.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 3 Jul 93 22:04 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
Subject: Re: Is AT&T no Longer Asking For Caller Name on a Collect Call?
Organization: I.E.C.C.


> [Moderator's Note: Now what would happen if when the call supervised,
> for a few seconds all operator positions were busy? That is, my phone
> rings, I answer, John Doe is waiting to call me collect.

AT&T has centralized their offices into very large bureaus.  (I hear
that there's only one or two for all of New England, for example.)
When you have large numbers of calls and large numbers of operators,
it is straightforward to use queueing theory to design your system to
make any particular level of delay as unlikely as you want.

I also imagine that there is always a large queue of calls of various
types to be processed, and that the second half of an in-progress call
would get high priority, since for most other types of calls a customer
wouldn't be upset by a ring or two before the operator cut in.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gary Merinstein)
Subject: Re: Using a Cellular on a PC Modem
Date: 5 Jul 1993 13:56:56 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ricardo
Cantu) writes:

>    Anyone out there know how I can use a cellular phone to make calls
> on my PC modem?  A friend told me all I needed was to make a straight
> RJ11<=>RJ45 connector and set the cellular to off-hook dialing.  Will
> this work?  Are there any other ways to do this?  Are there any
> products on the market that will provide a solution to this problem?
> Please send any ideas, thoughts or comments.  Also, if any of you have
> accomplished this already, what is the line quality like?  Let me
> know.

If this does work, you still have to adjust your comm software to
tolerate the delays that accompany the cell-handoffs that are inherent
with cellular phone service; what you really want is a cellular packet
data service network, which is approx a year away (i think, don't hold
me to the time-frame). i've used cellular phone service to link my
laptop with my company's mainframe vm session: the connection was
extremely slow and noisy.


[e-mail]   mci:  489-6979   ci$ 74035,1232

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fred Morris)
Subject: Re: 127 Years Ago
Date: 5 Jul 1993 13:43:23 -0700
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


[e-mail] (matt healy) writes:

> On 27 July 1866, the first successful Transatlantic Telegraph Cable
> began commercial operation, after a decade-long series of failures.
> On its first day of operation, it earned about 1000 Pounds Sterling in
> revenues -- for a 9 bit per second channel!  Imagine the cost per
> megabyte of downloading ...

I calculate 0.0116 British Pounds per second.

I think that what you are saying is one byte per second ... so that is
equivalent to the cost per byte: two cents (American), give or take.

Hmm ... that is a little pricey ...

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Randal L. Schwartz)
Subject: Re: Only in Texas
Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 23:45:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (K
Husain) writes:

> I saw a similar listing in the Austin, residence pages by a Heanauder
> Titzhoff a few years ago. Don't see him here now. If I remember
> correctly some guy did answer the phone and acknowldege the name when
> my roommate had called.  Found it quite by accident actually ...

Several years ago, one of the Portland Oregon phonebook whitepages had
"FARRAH ... FAWCETT" as the range of last names covered on that page.
No kidding.


Just another phone user,

Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services [phone]
[e-mail] (semi-permanent) [e-mail] (for newsreading only)

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Data/Fax/Voice on Same Line?
From: Joe Markovic <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 23:14:00 -0400
Organization: CRS Online  (Toronto, Ontario)


In article <[e-mail]>, Steve Fogarty <fogarty@engr01.
isu.edu> writes;

>  The problem of distinguishing between voice and fax calls can
> be dealt with by using a fax switch.  However, the only way (as far as
> I know) to have the fax switch distinguish data calls is to send
> special codes along with the phone number.  This method I have found
> to be unreliable and difficult because anyone calling over a modem
> must know the special codes.  Even if successful this was successful
> however, I would need special communications software to initialize
> the 96/96 board correctly. That is, if a call reaches the software
> (i.e. it's a fax or data call) then the software must initialize the
> 96/96 board for proper reception.  The other restriction is that I
> need the software to be a Windows 3.1 application so that work can
> continue to be done on my PC while the communication line is open.

Have you considered using the "distinctive ringing" feature to solve
this problem?

Here is how I'd implement it;

Where (A)- incoming phone line
      (B)- device/software to identify the "ring"
      (C)- device/software to identify voice/fax

-----(A)-----(B)----(C)----[phone]
              |      |
              |      ------[fax]
              |
              -------------[computer]

I'd recommend a hardware implementation, as it would be the most
transparent to you and ought to have less conflict with your system.


ciao,

Joe

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paolo Bellutta)
Subject: Re: Gnocchi al Telefono
Organization: Oregon Health Sciences University
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1993 00:49:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Gabe M Wiener) writes:

> While dining at a nearby Italian eatery, I noticed a rather peculiar
> pasta dish on the menu:

>              Gnocchi al Telefono

> which I proceeded to order.  It was quite good Gnocchi, but I'm
> curious as to what exactly the origin of the name is.

I'm Italian, an I never heard about such a kind of Gnocchi.  On the
other hand Gnocco is sometimes used with the meaning of "dumb",
so "gnocchi al telefono" also sounds like "dumb people talking at
the phone" ;-)

> I was hoping it would be garnished with a Motorola cellular, or at
> least a trusty WECO 2500 which I would be entitled to take home.
> Alas, only parsley and a little basil.

Parseley and basil you mean like tomato sauce with parsley and basil?
I know of the sage and butter gnocchi.  Or maybe, just maybe, that was
the only Italian word they knew would sound OK with gnocchi.


Paolo Bellutta -- [e-mail] - tel: [phone]
BICC - OHSU - 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park rd. - Portland, OR

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #450
******************************